Logical reasoning PrepTest 130 · Section 3 · Question 2

Incorrect. It's only a flaw to fail to provide a definition for a word if that word is used in a non-traditional sense, or it's allowed to shift in meaning through the stimulus. Here, there's no indication that the idea of beauty has shifted in any way between the discussion of art and the natural world.

Incorrect. Whether something is beautiful is certainly an opinion and not a factual matter, so this answer doesn't correctly describe the stimulus.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Errors in Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Art → Beautiful AND Something to teach
Natural world - Beautiful AND Something to teach
Therefore - The natural world is art

Answer Anticipation:
This argument establishes a conditional rule that sets up two necessary conditions for being art, and then it concludes that something that has those two conditions is art. That's an illegal reversal, so let's find an answer reflecting that.

Answer Explanation:
This answer describes the illegal reversal. All works of art are established as being beautiful and instructive, but that doesn't mean everything that has those two qualities is art. The argument treats that as if it were the case, though, so this answer correctly describes the flaw in the argument.

Key Takeaway:
When an Error in Reasoning stimulus features a conditional statement, one of the most common set of flaws will be illegal reversals/negations, so start by considering those conditional logic errors.

Incorrect. Beauty and instructiveness are treated as two independent necessary conditions, not as related to each other.

Incorrect. If this answer stated that the argument fails to consider there are things that are beautiful and instructive but not art, then it'd be correct—but that's not what it says. It also shifts between the stimulus that discusses the natural world as a whole and parts of the natural world. Two reasons to eliminate this answer!