Logical reasoning PrepTest 149 · Section 3 · Question 13

Incorrect. not Physical phenomenon → not Explained by science. Close, but this is a reversal of the connection we're looking for. It goes from the conclusion to the premise.

Incorrect. It's unclear whether emotions can be felt by only one person (almost everyone can feel anger, but a specific instance of anger isn't shared), but the argument is about scientific explanations, not study. Science can study things that it can't explain (that's how discoveries happen!). A faster elimination? This answer doesn't connect to the new term in the conclusion.

Incorrect. Whether or not they have a similar framework, this answer fails to connect a lack of ability to explain these phenomena with them not being physical.

Incorrect. This answer establishes that if something isn't physical, it's emotional. That can justify a conclusion that something is physical or emotional, but not a conclusion that something isn't. After all, if something is emotional, that doesn't guarantee it's not physical based on this answer—drawing that conclusion would be an illegal reversal.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen with Sufficient Premise

Stimulus Summary:
Emotions can't be explained by science, so they must not be physical.

Answer Anticipation:
Strengthen with Sufficient Premise questions generally bring up a new term in the conclusion and have correct answers that connect that term to something from the premises.

Here, the conclusion talks about emotions not being a physical phenomena, but it never establishes what would guarantee something isn't physical in the premises. What it does it establish is that emotions can't be explained by science.

Since "emotions" tie the premises and conclusion together, we need to connect what is established about them in the premises (can't be explained by science) to what is concluded about them (they're not physical):

If something can't be explained by science, then it's not a physical phenomenon.

Answer Explanation:
Physical → Explained by science. Or, not Explained by science → not Physical. This answer connects the premise to the conclusion, thus allowing that conclusion to follow logically.

Key Takeaway:
When a Strengthen with Sufficient Premise question introduces a new term or concept in the conclusion, the correct answer will almost always connect that term to something from the premises. And make sure you pick an answer that makes that connection from the premise(s) to the conclusion instead of the reversal!