PrepTest 122

Incorrect. This answer can establish that an economic system is the fairest, but not that any individual element of that economy is fair, so it doesn't justify the conclusion.

Incorrect. This answer doesn't address fairness at all so it can't justify the conclusion.

Incorrect. This answer also doesn't address fairness at all, so it also can't justify the conclusion.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen with Sufficient Premise

Stimulus Summary:
Some: Pro sports players are paid too much

Vanwilligan: They're paid what someone is willing to pay them, and they make a lot of money for the team's owners, so their pay is fair.

Answer Anticipation:
First, we have to note that Vanwilligan is an awesome name.

That out of the way, most Strengthen with Sufficient Premise questions will introduce a new concept in the conclusion that needs to be connected to some concept from the premises. That trend plays out here.

The new concept raised in the conclusion is fairness. Yes, this does show up earlier in the stimulus, but it's mentioned as a part of the opposing point, not in a premise of Vanwilligan's argument. As such, Vanwilligan never establishes what constitutes fair pay, and thus his conclusion can't be valid.

What Vanwilligan (yes, we're taking every opportunity to say his name) does establish is that the salaries of professional athletes are what the market/team owners are willing to pay. So to bridge the gap between the premises and conclusion, we should look for an answer stating that if someone's willing to pay a salary, then that salary is fair.

Answer Explanation:
This answer connects the premise directly to the conclusion. Team owners are willing to pay athletes their extraordinary salaries, and this answer establishes that that makes them fair, justifying the conclusion.

Key Takeaway:
Always be on the lookout for new concepts in the conclusion of Strengthen with Sufficient Premise questions. They show up an inordinate amount of the time, and spotting one will narrow down which answers even have a chance of being correct. Taking the extra step of figuring out which term from the premise(s) it needs to be connected to can also almost always lead you to a very specific and spot-on anticipation.

Incorrect. This answer establishes a necessary condition for a salary to be fair. Since the argument concludes that the salary is fair, there needs to be a sufficient condition for fairness to justify it. Remember that conditionals justify a conclusion that matches their necessary condition based on establishing their sufficient condition.