PrepTest 143

Incorrect. The analogy is between semiplaning monohulls and jet planes, and the price is one of the points of comparison between them. The comparable elements make up the analogy, they're not themselves analogies. There are also more than 2 points of comparison.

Incorrect. Ignoring that it's not an analogy itself but rather a point in the analogy, there's no second analogy that is pointed to as this answer choice states.

Incorrect. While it does serve as a distinction between these ships, it doesn't support the argument's main conclusion. The argument overcomes this objection to reach its conclusion.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Argument Structure

Stimulus Summary:
Semiplaning monohulls/Jet plane cons Ð Higher fuel needs, higher cost
Semiplaning monohulls/Jet planes pros Ð Faster travel, more reliable
Jet planes Ð Profitable
Conclusion Ð Like jet planes, semiplaning monohulls will be profitable

Answer Anticipation:
This argument relies completely on its comparison between semiplaning monohulls (yes, we're sick of typing that) and jet planes, so any answer will likely reflect that element of the argument.

The statement in question raises a downside of semiplaning monohull travel—the high cost. However, that downside is then said to have existed in an analogous situation—jet planes—and they managed to become profitable because of all the benefits of jet travel. From that, the argument concludes that semiplaning monohulls will also become profitable, thus overcoming that downside as jet planes did.

So the statement in question is a counterpoint that might suggest these ships won't be successful that is then countered by an analogous situation.

Answer Explanation:
This answer correctly describes the role. The high cost might suggest that these new ships won't be successful—that's a potential objection to the conclusion that they will be profitable. However, the argument then analogizes between the new ships and jet planes to overcome this objection by showing another situation that overcame a similar problem.

Key Takeaway:
When an argument relies on an analogy and/or comparisons, they generally take over the logic and, thus, the correct (and incorrect) answers. Make sure you understand how that analogy/those comparisons work so you can analyze the answers more efficiently.

Incorrect. The conclusion doesn't involve a distinction between airplanes, so this answer doesn't correctly describe the argument.