PrepTest 126

Incorrect. This answer connects a lack of freedom of thought (limiting thought to a particular orthodoxy) to a lack of intellectual progress—that is the connection that the argument refutes, not one that it wants to support.

Incorrect. The stimulus never discusses a society that values intellectual progress, so this answer is out of scope.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen with Sufficient Premise

Stimulus Summary:
Opposing point:
Freedom of thought allows thinkers to pursue ideas, therefore Intellectual progress → Freedom of thought

Professor:
Intellectual progress → Mine full implications of interrelated ideas
Mine full implications of interrelated ideas → Intellectual discipline
Therefore — The opposing argument fails

Answer Anticipation:
These abstract, philosophical questions are the worst!

When we see them, we should focus on tracking the ideas that are repeated. Here, we see quite a few terms that show up multiple times. But let's start by simplifying and rephrasing the Professor's argument, and then seeing where it breaks down.

First, let's simplify the premises. Instead of looking at the entire conditional chain, we can just look at the endpoints (since Strengthen with Sufficient Premise questions almost always rely on all premises to lead to the correct answer):
Intellectual progress → Intellectual discipline

Second, let's rephrase that conclusion to reflect the content of the opposing argument, and what it means for it to fail. That argument concludes that intellectual discipline is required for intellectual progress. Since the Professor believes it fails as an argument, she believes that it isn't necessary for progress.

So rephrasing the Professor's argument, we get:
Intellectual discipline is necessary for intellectual progress, so freedom of thought can't be necessary for intellectual progress.

What links these two together is the idea of intellectual progress, so the gap in the argument needs to relate discipline to freedom of thought, showing that the former precludes the latter:
Intellectual discipline → not Freedom of thought
Freedom of thought → not Intellectual discipline

If that were true, and intellectual progress requires intellectual discipline, then it can't require freedom of thought (since the two are mutually exclusive). Let's find an answer making this connection.

Answer Explanation:
This answer draws the connection missing from the argument. If freedom of thought invariably leads to a lack of intellectual discipline, which is in turn necessary for intellectual progress, then freedom of thought can't be required for such progress, justifying the conclusion that the argument for freedom of thought fails.

Key Takeaway:
For these abstract and philosophical arguments, don't spend too much time trying to wrap your head around the meaning of it. Instead, focus on the ideas that are repeated, tracking them through the argument to see how it's structured, and where the gap is. These arguments almost always have these overlapping concepts that let you find a gap by seeing where they link together, and where there's a missing link.

Incorrect. If anything, setting up freedom of thought as leading to the discovery of truth, and the discovery of truth arguably being synonymous with intellectual progress, this answer supports the opposing point, so it wouldn't justify the Professor's argument.

Incorrect. This answer positively connects intellectual discipline and freedom of thought (Freedom of thought → Intellectual discipline), whereas the author relies on one precluding the other, so this answer undercuts the argument.