PrepTest 118

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Methods of Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
You'd be skeptical of an unsigned letter, so it makes sense to be similarly skeptical of an anonymous source in a news story.

Answer Anticipation:
This argument justifies a judgment drawn in one situation (anonymous news sources) based on the similarities to another situation where that same judgment would be drawn. That's a common method of reasoning—arguing by analogy, or appealing to a common principle. Any answer that uses this or similar language to highlight that the argument uses a comparable situation to justify its conclusion will be the correct answer.

Answer Explanation:
This answer highlights that the argument raises a situation where a judgment would be drawn to justify the same judgment in a similar/analogous situation. This is the correct answer.

Key Takeaway:
One common trick to increase the difficulty of a Methods of Reasoning question is to present a common method of argumentation and then reference it in multiple answers, getting the details wrong. Here, the argument itself was an argument by analogy, and three answers used the word "analogy." It was up to you to first quickly eliminate the answers that didn't talk about analogies, and second pick between the remaining ones.

Incorrect. First, the argument uses the analogy to conclude that the attitude adopted in the situation of the unsigned letter should apply to the situation of the anonymous sources, not that that attitude is better justified. Second, even if we ignore that for a second, the unsigned letter situation was the first attitude discussed and the one the author believes to be justified, so it's incorrect to say that the "latter" attitude is better justified.

Incorrect. Rephrasing this answer, it says that the argument generalizes from a hypothetical. First, the unsigned letter situation is a hypothetical, but it's a generic one—so it doesn't generalize from a single hypothetical but rather raises a general hypothetical. Second, the anonymous source situation is based on real situations, not hypotheticals.

Incorrect. The argument never shows that any type of evidence is usually false—just that it might be false and would be hard to verify, and thus calls for skepticism.

Incorrect. The argument states that anonymous sources can plant inaccurate or slanted statements without having to answer for them, but that's not the same as calling their motives into question. It also doesn't conclude that information is likely to be false, just that they might be false.