Logical reasoning PrepTest 147 · Section 1 · Question 7

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen with Necessary Premise

Stimulus Summary:
The Mayor makes statements with confidence, so he is not an introspective person.

Answer Anticipation:
If you can strip this argument down to the bare minimum as we did here, then it's a lot easier to see the connection that must be made for the argument to work.

Starting with the first two sentences, they essentially say the same thing with three synonyms—bold, certain, confident. We summarized it as confidence, but the answer could use any (or all) of those words.

After those opening statements, the Journalist starts a statement with, "While," which is used to highlight something the author of an argument agrees with but believes is a concession to an opposing point or outside their own main point. Which is why we disregarded it from our summary.

"While" is also generally attached to the author's main point, or the author's main premise—here, it's the Journalist's opinion of the mayor, so it's the main point.

With the argument stripped down, we can see the assumption—someone who makes statements with boldness/utter certainty/confidence is not an introspective person. Let's find an answer establishing that.

Answer Explanation:
This answer connects what we know about the mayor to the conclusion. If introspective people do make assertions with utter certainty and confidence, then we can no longer be certain the mayor isn't an introspective person. This answer is necessary for the argument to work.

Key Takeaway:
When you can really strip an argument down to a few key concepts, you can often find a straightforward jump between two terms makes up the assumption in the argument. Doing so can make it a lot easier to identify the correct answer, or at least a couple answers one of which must be correct, because they're the only ones that connect those ideas.

Incorrect. This answer applies something that the Journalist already established about the mayor to all politicians. As such, it's not necessary (too broad) and already a part of the argument.

Incorrect. If you saw that first statement as the main point of the argument, then you might consider this answer choice. However, even then, this answer would reverse the logic of the argument—there, arguably, the certainty and confidence are used to support an intermediate conclusion of boldness, not the other way around.

Incorrect. This answer is the negation of the relationship the argument relies on to reach its conclusion.

Incorrect. The popularity of politicians is a concession or side point to the argument, not the main point, and so any answer related to that isn't necessary for the argument to work.