Logical reasoning PrepTest 132 · Section 2 · Question 14

Incorrect. The two stated premises of the Professor's argument are that rappers work alone and don't have a formal learning process. The Critic doesn't discuss them working in groups or having some type of formal education in rap, so this answer is incorrect.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument/Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed/Valid

Question Type:
Methods of Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
MP: Rappers can work alone and don't need formal teaching, so it's individualistic and nontraditional.

MC: Rap uses older songs, have developed traditions, and play to public preferences (so it's not individualist/traditional).

Answer Anticipation:
First, note that we wrote a conclusion into the Critic's argument (in parentheses) that's not explicitly stated. However, the Critic starts her argument with a "But," showing that she's rebutting the statement made at the end of the Professor's argument. It's not important that you thought through the specific conclusion implied by the Critic's statements, but it is important that you recognized the pivot words that kicked off her statements and decided it meant she was attacking the Professor's conclusion.

Now, how does she attack his conclusion? In general, someone can undermine an opposing point by going after its evidence or logic, or introducing information that the first argument didn't consider. The Critic doesn't address the two points made by the Professor, and she doesn't bring up a logical fallacy. Instead, she brings up considerations that aren't discussed by the Professor to call his conclusion into question.

Answer Explanation:
The Critic does challenge the Professor's conclusion about tradition and individualism lacking in rap by bringing up three aspects of rap the Professor doesn't discuss. This answer reflects that, so it's correct.

Key Takeaway:
In general, a rebuttal will undermine an argument by attacking the premises, attacking their relationship to the conclusion (i.e., the logic), or by introducing new evidence. Knowing which method is being used is frequently key to getting two-speaker questions correct.

Incorrect. Both the Professor and Critic limit their statements to rap, so this answer doesn't reflect the stimulus.

Incorrect. The Critic brings up new phenomena in rap, not the ones mentioned by the Professor, so this answer is incorrect. This answer would be correct in a two-speaker stimulus where the second speaker uses the premises of the first argument with new context to reach a different conclusion, not new premises to reach a different conclusion.

Incorrect. First, this answer is too broad in discussing all music instead of just one genre. Second, the Critic doesn't challenge each of a group of claims—she challenges one claim by bringing in new information.