Logical reasoning PrepTest 133 · Section 2 · Question 12

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts

Question Type:
Must Be True

Stimulus Summary:
Phenomenon - Newspapers are printing antienvironmental articles
Winslow's explanation - Editors like to run "daring" articles that challenge prevailing positions
Commentator - That's true about editors and why they run these articles, but anti-environmentalism isn't actually against the prevailing position

Answer Anticipation:
This is an interesting Must Be True question in that it features a phenomenon/explanation structure, and a "rebuttal" that largely agrees with the separate viewpoint it brings up (Winslow's) while arguing against a completely different viewpoint (that of the newspaper editors).

As such, it's really hard to imagine what the correct answer will focus on. The overlap between the Commentator's view and Winslow's is one possibility, but it's going to be more important to keep the viewpoints straight as we analyze the answers than to have a strong anticipation.

Answer Explanation:
This answer reflects the statement made by the Commentator—"It is true that. . . "—so this is the correct answer. Note that the Commentator doesn't say that she believes Winslow's statement is true, but rather that it is true, and so we can support this answer.

Key Takeaway:
Even when it's presented by a viewpoint, accepting a premise that a statement is "true" means accepting it as fact, not as a viewpoint or a belief.

Incorrect. The stimulus doesn't commit to the critics being successful ("however much they may have succeeded"), but it also doesn't commit to them not being successful. And, at the very least, it appears as if they have sold themselves as such to newspaper editors, so they've been at least partially successful.

Incorrect. The Commentator states that Winslow's explanation is true, so this answer is unsupported.

Incorrect. The stimulus notes that serious environmentalism isn't politically orthodox ("is by no means"), so the Commentator argues that the position the critics of environmentalism—i.e., the antienvironmentalists—isn't the prevailing position.

Incorrect. The Commentator makes no predictions about the future, so this answer is out of scope.