PrepTest 148

Incorrect. The conclusion is about apples being cultivated "in this region," so other regions are out of scope.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Errors in Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Today, wild apples are smaller than cultivated apples. Scientists looking for cultivated apples from 5,000 years ago didn't find any apples bigger than the wild apples, so apples probably weren't cultivated back then.

Answer Anticipation:
This argument takes something that's true today and uses it to draw a conclusion about what was true 5,000 years ago. However, it's possible that the cultivated apples back then were much closer in size to wild apples than they are today. Any answer choice that deals with this jump through time will serve to point out the flaw in this argument.

Answer Explanation:
This answer choice highlights how things could change over time, thus pointing out a flaw in the argument. If apple cultivation started around 5,000 years ago, and cultivated plants only get bigger over time, then these early cultivated apples might be about the same size as the wild ones—a difference compared to their modern counterparts that calls the conclusion into question.

Key Takeaway:
Whenever an argument applies something true of the past to the present or future, or something true of the present to the past, there's an assumption that no relevant changes have happened (i.e., that the past/present/future are comparable). That's a big assumption, and the correct answer will likely highlight it.

Incorrect. While the argument only addresses apples of a few sizes, it doesn't rely on there being no apples of other sizes—just that wild apples are smaller than cultivated apples, no matter what those sizes are.

Incorrect. There's no contradiction in the argument.

Incorrect. The argument uses the relative sizes of apples to prove its conclusion about the cultivation of apples, so it isn't circular.