PrepTest 144

Incorrect. The conclusion isn't that every religion could or should modernize, just that those that do will see increased worshipers.

Incorrect. The message being shared is out of scope of the argument—the argument itself only deals in modernization and attendance.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen with Sufficient Premise

Stimulus Summary:
Some religions have recently modernized, and then they saw increased attendance, so modernization will result in increased attendance.

Answer Anticipation:
A change was made. It was followed by another change. So the first one caused the second. This is a classic correlation/causation flaw—that "will result in" was a giveaway in the conclusion.

Note that the question stem has a little bit more than the average Errors in Reasoning stem to it—it specifically states that the flaw is because "the scholar presumes without giving sufficient justification that." This tells us that the correct answer is going to state an assumption of the argument (almost as if this were a Strengthen/Strengthen with Necessary Premise question), so we should look for something that states the modernization was the cause of the increased attendance.

Answer Explanation:
This answer highlights that the argument assumes causality based on a mere correlation. It's assuming that the noted change drove the effect—when it's possible some other change led to both the modernization and the attendance increase.

Key Takeaway:
Arguments that raise a timeline—this happened, and it was followed by something else—are frequently introducing a correlation that the argument is going to use to jump to a causal conclusion. Look for this in the premises as much as you look for causal language in the conclusion—it can't hurt to know what direction the stimulus is likely to take earlier on!

Incorrect. The conclusion states that modernization will work to increase the number of worshipers, not that it's the only method or that it's necessary to do so.

Incorrect. Irreversible? The argument is about increasing attendance, not doing so forever.