PrepTest 141

Incorrect. This is an implied intermediate conclusion of the argument. Some fear that accepting these lights as a gift will influence the city's decision, but it's unfounded because favoritism is prevented by the bidding procedure. This then supports the conclusion that there's no real issue in accepting the lights.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Main Point

Stimulus Summary:
Proposal: Accept lighting company's light donation
Argument against: The company is trying to influence the city in awarding contractsRebuttal: The company's only ulterior motive is to demonstrate their lights during an upcoming convention, and the city's bidding procedure prevents favoritism.Conclusion: There's no problem in accepting the lights

Answer Anticipation:
One way to help break down the structure of an argument is to use some of the skills we've developed working in Argument Structure questions, as well as in defining different features or structures in argument. By laying out the proposal (background information) and the opposing point (the free gifts will influence the city's decisions), it becomes a lot easier to see where the Legislator's argument goes.

First, in highlighting the proposal, we can determine that the Legislator's opinion of that proposal is likely to be the main point. Here, the Legislator's opinions is that "there would be no real problem" with accepting that proposal/the lights. Also, in seeing that there is an opposing point mentioned, we can contextualize the ending of the argument as a rebuttal to that opposing point, showing why the gift won't lead to the feared influence over city contract decisions. That backs up the determination that the Legislator's opinion on the proposal—again, that there's no problem in accepting it/the lights—is the main point of the argument. Finally, adverbs like "Surely" generally are used to introduce opinions, and frequently conclusions, providing another data point backing up this statement as the main point.

Answer Explanation:
The stimulus is about the mayor's proposal. The Legislator's opinion of that proposal is that "there would be no problem" in accepting it and the free lights. This answer reflects the Legislator's opinion on the topic in question, and so it's the main point of the argument.

Key Takeaway:
Just because it's a Main Point question doesn't mean you shouldn't think about the roles of all statements in the stimulus. By doing so, you can help to identify likely structures to the argument that will provide hints as to what the conclusion might be. Here, noting that the argument was a debate over the mayor's proposal would have let you determine that the likely main point was the Legislator's opinion of that proposal—that there was no problem in accepting it—and thus determined the correct answer more efficiently.

Incorrect. This answer isn't stated in the argument and so it can't be the main point.

Incorrect. This answer is part of the rebuttal against the fear that the free lights will influence future decisions on the city's part, supporting the conclusion that there's no problem in accepting the lights.

Incorrect. This answer reflects the only ulterior motivation the Legislator could find, which served as part of the rebuttal to what some fear. Since it was part of the rebuttal and this answer doesn't perfectly reflect what was said, it's at best a premise and at worst a term shift away from the stimulus—in either case, it's wrong.