Logical reasoning PrepTest 127 · Section 2 · Question 25

Incorrect. While it isn't the argument's only conclusion, it also isn't the main conclusion—it supports that first sentence.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Argument Structure

Stimulus Summary:
Insects develop resistance to insecticides, so farmers have to use more and more of it, so using it is counterproductive.

Answer Anticipation:
As with all questions based on argument structure, we should use a heavy mix of logic and structural keywords to quickly figure out the argument structure.

Here, the first sentence is an opinion that calls for backup, so there's a good chance it's a conclusion right off the bat. The second sentence starts with, "Because," highlighting that we're about to get a premise, and we'll likely get a conclusion later in the sentence. That pans out—the resistance of insects to pesticides supports that farmers will have to use more and more of it to get the same effect.

We now have a premise and two conclusions, so we need to figure out which supports the other, and this is where the logical analysis kicks in. The need to use more and more insecticide is a reason to believe that its use is counterproductive, so that last clause supports the first sentence, making it an intermediate conclusion. Since that's the statement in question, we should look for the intermediate conclusion answer choice.

Answer Explanation:
If a causal explanation is provided for a statement, then that statement is a conclusion. Here, the premise supporting the statement in question is that using insecticides "increases" the resistance of insects to it, so a causal premise does back it up—the first half of this answer is correct. The second half goes on to state that the statement in question directly supports the main point of the argument, which, as a subsidiary conclusion, it does, so this is our answer.

Key Takeaway:
Any question that focuses on argument structure will likely provide some structural indicator clues as to the role of certain statements. Rely on these to make quick determinations as to how the argument works, and use logic to analyze any outstanding questions—such as, between two conclusions, which one is the main point.

Incorrect. There are two conclusions in the argument, including the statement in question as a subsidiary conclusion supporting the main point.

Incorrect. While this answer describes the structure of the argument overall, it casts the statement in question as the premise supporting the intermediate conclusion, whereas it's actually the intermediate conclusion itself, as indicated by the structural indicator word "Because" introducing the supporting clause ahead of it.

Incorrect. The main conclusion isn't a causal explanation, it's an assessment of the wisdom of a certain practice.