Logical reasoning PrepTest 131 · Section 2 · Question 6

Incorrect. There are only two scholars who this answer might be referring to—Jaaks and Yancey. Jaaks is being argued against, so the argument isn't relying on his word and thus his qualifications are irrelevant (though he is a respected historian, which seems on point). Yancey's qualifications aren't noted, so we can't conclude—as this answer states—that she's unqualified.

Incorrect. The author of the argument does address why she believes Yancey's book is accurate (even if those reasons are bad), and she doesn't attack Jaaks' character, so this ad hominem answer is incorrect.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Errors in Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Yancey used similar methods in this book as her other, popular books. This book is popular. Therefore, the book must be accurate.

Answer Anticipation:
The first—and arguably one of the most important—steps in getting this question right is understanding what the conclusion is actually saying. It goes out of its way to spread it between the first two sentences and obscuring it by phrasing it as an opposing point that the author of the argument disagrees with. That opposing point is Jaaks, who's negative review "rests on a mistake" in stating that Yancey's book is "inaccurate[]." Rephrasing that mishmash of content to reflect the actual opinion of the author of this argument, we get the conclusion we wrote in our summary—that Yancey's book is accurate. That's much easier to deal with!

Why does the author believe that Yancey's book must be accurate? It doesn't dive into the underlying facts. Instead, it relies on the popularity of her books. Even the research methods aren't noted as being particularly accurate—instead, they're noted as having been used in the Yancey's other books which are "very popular."

So once we strip all the ancillary information out of this stimulus, we end up with a much more straightforward argument—Yancey's books are popular, therefore they must be accurate. That's a massive jump between unrelated concepts, and the correct answer should point that out.

Answer Explanation:
This answer choice highlights the jump made in the argument. The premises arguing in favor of Yancey's book are about how popular it is, and how other, popular books used similar research methods. There's no reason to believe these books are accurate other than that they're popular, a huge term shift, so this is the correct answer.

Key Takeaway:
When a conclusion reflects an opposing point, be sure to rephrase the conclusion to reflect the actual content of what the author is trying to say. Frequently, trying to see the gap in an argument where the conclusion is referential is harder than it needs to be.

Incorrect. The conclusion is about a single book, so it can't be a generalization.

Incorrect. The argument never discusses other methods, or Yancey's methods being the only valid method, so this answer is out of scope.