PrepTest 118

Incorrect. The Columnist doesn't question the Analysts' premises—she agrees that Boomers are going to start thinking about retirement and shift from consumption to saving. She differs in her conclusion as to what they're going to use to save.

Incorrect. Trap answer! The Columnist does state that the Analysts stand to gain if their argument were true, but that's different from saying that they're making the argument for self-serving reasons. They may just be ignoring counterarguments because of wishful thinking! Additionally, by making a longer argument about why she disagrees, she's not committing an ad hominem flaw.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Methods of Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Analysts argue Boomers will start saving as they get older, putting money into stocks and driving stock prices up. They'd gain from this, but Boomers buying less will lead to lower stock prices, so they'll probably invest elsewhere, and the analysts will be wrong.

Answer Anticipation:
First, it's important to note a potential trap answer here. The Columnist does question the bias of the Analysts in stating that they'd stand to gain from their analysis. However, that's not the entirety of her rebuttal—instead, she lays out reasons to believe they're wrong—so she doesn't commit an ad hominem fallacy.

Instead, she brings up a new argument that rebuts the Analysts', so it's important to see if they disagree on premises or conclusion. The conclusions are definitely contradictory (stocks vs. "other than stocks"), but the premises start from the same place. Both the Columnist and Analysts agree that Boomers will start to think about retirement, shifting from consuming to saving. However, they disagree on the impact this will have on stock prices, with the Columnist bringing up some considerations that the Analysts neglect. The answer should reflect these points of agreement and disagreement.

Answer Explanation:
This answer reflects that the Columnist agrees with the premises—that Boomers will start to think about retirement and move from spending to saving—but disagrees with how they're going to go about doing so. She reaches an alternative conclusion from the initial set of facts, so this answer is correct.

Key Takeaway:
When the author of an argument disagrees with an opposing point, see if they agree or disagree on any premises. That overlap, if it exists, is almost always relevant to getting the question correct.

Incorrect. While the Columnist does state that she believes the Analysts are being overly optimistic, she thinks that their conclusion is wrong. They say that Boomers will invest in stocks; she says that they'll invest in things other than stocks.

Incorrect. The Analysts' conclusion is that the Boomers will drive up stock prices by investing in them; the Columnist doesn't think this will happen. Those are different conclusions.