Logical reasoning PrepTest 151 · Section 4 · Question 7

Incorrect. The conclusion doesn't state that increasing productivity shouldn't be pursued. It simply states that doing so will have a downside (increased unemployment). Since the argument doesn't recommend against increasing productivity, this answer is out of scope.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Errors in Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Increasing productivity at a corporation typically involves firing people, so increasing productivity across the economy may help businesses, but it'll hurt workers.

Answer Anticipation:
There's a key phrase in the conclusion here that should get you to start thinking about a particular flaw. That phrase? "[A]s a whole." Whenever the conclusion is about something as a whole, there's a good chance it's jumping from something true of a part to something true of the whole.

Here, what does the argument base its conclusion about the outcome of doing something on the economy as a whole? The outcome of doing that thing at a single corporation. That's a jump from a part of the economy to the whole economy, so the answer will highlight this part-to-whole jump. (To highlight why that's a problem here, maybe increased productivity leads to each company firing some workers, but more businesses being created that will hire those workers and more. You wouldn't need to think of this possibility, though, to get the answer correct here!)

Answer Explanation:
This answer choice highlights the jump from the example about a single corporation to the results of doing the same thing economy-wide.

Key Takeaway:
Key phrases like "as a whole" are great ways to orient around the correct flaw in an argument quickly and accurately. During review, it's important to note what language you could have picked up on that would have allowed you to anticipate the answer faster. When you see key words, phrases, or concepts related to the correct answer repeat, you've got yourself a pattern that you can use to get through the section more efficiently!

Incorrect. First, the Politicians are established as an opposing viewpoint, but the conclusion doesn't directly address them, so this answer choice mischaracterizes the argument. Second, the stimulus even notes that this is something politicians often do, not something all politicians are doing.

Incorrect. The argument concludes that increasing the economy as a whole will impact both business owners and workers—it doesn't rank the importance of businesses versus workers, let alone increased productivity versus the interests of either of those groups.

Incorrect. This answer would be in scope for a conclusion about whether productivity should be increased, but the conclusion is just about the impacts, not whether it's worth it.