Logical reasoning PrepTest 140 · Section 3 · Question 5

Incorrect. The art analogy discusses a change in the art people prefer, so the author wouldn't end her argument by discussing how ads don't really change things.

Incorrect. By analogizing to a situation where there is "nothing wrong," the author is committed to similarly believing that ads aren't as socially pernicious as some argue.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts

Question Type:
Argument Completion

Stimulus Summary:
Some argue ads manipulate people and are bad. However, art classes change the art that people like and are fine, so __________.

Answer Anticipation:
This argument pivots away ("However") from the viewpoint of some people who believe ads are manipulative to talk about art. Since the author is using this as a rebuttal to the opposing viewpoint, she must be using it as an analogy to prove that ads are similar to these art classes. Since the art classes have "nothing wrong" with them, the author must believe that the ads are similarly not wrong.

Answer Explanation:
The author uses the preference changes driven by art classes as an analogy for ads changing people's buying preferences, determining that there's "nothing wrong" in the former. Thus, she'd conclude that, similarly, there's nothing wrong with ads changing people's preferences, as this answer choice states.

Key Takeaway:
Argument Completion questions are frequently about drawing comparisons and then drawing conclusions from those comparisons. When an author rebuts an argument with an analogy, the conclusion will frequently "complete" the analogy by carrying the conclusion from one situation into the other.

Incorrect. Two issues here. First, the "conclusion" of the analogy is that there's "nothing wrong" with changing art preferences, not that it's positive. Second, the analogy establishes that art classes do change people's behavior, so the conditional nature of this answer isn't perfectly parallel.

Incorrect. In drawing an analogy to a situation where something does change preferences, the author is unlikely to draw a conclusion that something doesn't change preferences.