Logical reasoning PrepTest 154 · Section 1 · Question 8

Incorrect. The analogy to driving doesn't discuss the purpose behind taking a class on either subject, so this answer is out of scope.

Incorrect. While the analogy does draw a distinction between driving and building a car, it doesn't state that these are different disciplines, just different things to learn.

Incorrect. There's no discussion of what skills are most likely to be used in either field.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts

Question Type:
Argument Completion

Stimulus Summary:
Statistics course: Should we teach theories, or practical application?
Analogy: This is like building a car vs. driving one.
Current: Statistics courses focus on "building," and shift to "driving" if there's time.
But you don't need to build a car to drive one, so __________.

Answer Anticipation:
This argument analogizes between cars and statistics, relating theory to building a car and practical applications to driving the car. According to the author, currently, courses focus on theory, and move to practical applications if there's time. However, she then pivots, stating that you don't need to "build" in order to "drive," so, to complete the argument and analogy, the correct answer should say you don't need to know statistical theory in order to employ statistical methods in practice.

Answer Explanation:
This answer essentially repeats the first half of that final sentence and replaces the car half of the analogy with the analogous portions of the statistics part, matching our anticipation.

Key Takeaway:
Analogies are inherently comparative. In general, if you identify what pieces of each half of the analogy match up, you can substitute one for the other in an Argument Completion question to draw the correct conclusion and answer.

Incorrect. The analogy doesn't include information about the teachers, just what they're teaching, so this answer is out of scope.