Logical reasoning PrepTest 134 · Section 3 · Question 5

Incorrect. Peter doesn't talk about the characters being frightening, so he doesn't have a clear opinion on this answer. Even Yoko says that modern bad guys being less frightening is good, but that doesn't mean she thinks they should be even less frightening still. This answer is out of scope.

Incorrect. This is out of scope of Peter's argument since he doesn't talk about fright at all. Even Yoko talks about frightening characters, not whether the stories themselves are frightening.

Incorrect. Neither of the speakers discusses quality, so this answer is completely out of scope.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument/Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed/Flawed

Question Type:
Point at Issue

Stimulus Summary:
P: Most modern kid stories don't have clear bad guys, but kids need to learn about consequences, so they should.

Y: They do, just not scary ones, which is better.

Answer Anticipation:
Peter starts his argument by stating that modern children's stories don't have clearly immoral characters in them, whereas Yoko starts hers by claiming that they do.

Peter goes on to say that stories should have clearly immoral characters in them—Yoko doesn't speak to what these stories should include, just what they do. At most, she suggests that they should have immoral characters that aren't frightening, so this is at best a point of agreement between them.

Peter then ends by saying kids need to learn that being bad has consequences, which Yoko doesn't speak to.

That opening statement, therefore, is the only point at issue between the two, so it should be reflected in the correct answer.

Answer Explanation:
Peter explicitly states that modern children's stories "don't have clearly immoral characters." Yoko states that they still tend to. This is the point at issue between them.

Key Takeaway:
Breaking down Point at Issue questions by working through what one speaker says and seeing where it overlaps with the second speaker is one approach. It tends to work better for arguments that are shorter and more straight-forward, but you should always have it in your back pocket in case you just can't find the point at issue.

Incorrect. Peter states that this is the case, but Yoko doesn't address the role of these stories, so this is out of scope of her argument.