Logical reasoning PrepTest 129 · Section 2 · Question 11

Incorrect. Pat believes removing these barriers promotes intimacy, so she'd presumably agree with this answer. Amar, however, doesn't discuss barriers to self-revelation, so this answer is out of scope of his statements.

Incorrect. Pat's email is about intimacy with strangers, not friends, so this answer is out of scope of her statements.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument/Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed/Flawed

Question Type:
Point at Issue

Stimulus Summary:
P: Email can be anonymous, which allows people to be more open. So email makes it easier to be intimate with strangers.

A: Intimacy → Real social bond
Real social bond → Direct personal contact
Therefore, frankness (and emails) don't provide intimacy

Answer Anticipation:
In looking for the point at issue between two speakers, we should see if they reach the same or different conclusions based on the same or different premises.

Pat discusses anonymity and openness in her premises. Amar doesn't address anonymity, and he agrees that there's a certain level of openness—or frankness—in these exchanges.

Amar discusses social bonds and direct personal contact in his premises. Pat doesn't touch on social bonds, but email doesn't involve direct personal contact, so we can say that they both discuss that, to an extent.

They both discuss intimacy in their conclusions, however, and their conclusions disagree, so that's the most likely place where a correct answer will come from! Pat believes that email can lead to intimacy between strangers, whereas Amar believes that intimacy requires direct personal contact (see how the two conditionals chain together), thus implying that he believes email—which doesn't involve or allow for direct personal contact—can't lead to intimacy. These divergent conclusions will likely be reflected in the correct answer.

Answer Explanation:
Pat believes that email removes barriers, and this promotes intimacy between strangers, so she'd agree with this answer. Amar, on the other hand, believes that intimacy requires direct personal contact, something those who communicate solely via email would lack, and thus he disagrees with this answer, making it the point at issue between them.

Key Takeaway:
Point at Issue questions have correct answers that both speakers have an opinion on. As such, identifying topics that both discuss is a great first step in seeing if they have opposed feelings on those shared topics.

Additionally, you can compare the premises and conclusions to see where the disagreements are. Finding premises that aren't shared can be helpful in identifying topics that will show up in incorrect answers, making for faster eliminations.

Incorrect. Amar believes intimacy requires a real social bond, but this answer treats those bonds as sufficient for intimacy, so we can't commit Amar to an opinion on this answer. Pat doesn't discuss social bonds, so it's out of scope of her statements.

Incorrect. Pat opens her statements with this answer, so she agrees with it. Amar, on the other hand, doesn't discuss barriers to self-revelation. While he does state that frankness isn't intimacy, he could believe that frankness is self-revelation—just not intimacy.