PrepTest 145

Incorrect. This answer is an intermediate conclusion, backed up by the rest of that first sentence and then supporting the second sentence.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Main Point

Stimulus Summary:
At any time, a study could be published making the public turn completely against GMOs, so farmers growing them are at great financial risk. Their price doesn't justify the risk. Therefore, it's unwise for farmers to grow them.

Answer Anticipation:
While this argument's first sentence includes a structural keyword ("because") that tells us it includes a premise (after "because") and conclusion (before it), the remaining sentences lack any keywords and so we'll need to rely on analyzing the logic to determine if the first half of that opening sentence is the main point or a subsidiary conclusion.

Despite the lack of keywords, there is a hint that the second sentence is a conclusion—it calls something "unwise." That's an opinion that would need to be backed up by a premise. That following sentence—balancing the risks and rewards of planting GMOs—does support whether it's wise to focus on growing these crops.

So it comes down to the first half of the first sentence, or that second sentence. We'll have to ask ourselves which supports which, and at that point, it becomes clear that the opening statement supports the second sentence. The great financial risk in planting GMOs supports that doing so is unwise. The correct answer, then, will repeat that second sentence.

Answer Explanation:
This answer swaps in "not prudent" for "unwise," but those words are essentially synonyms, so this is the correct answer.

Key Takeaway:
Opinion statements are frequently conclusions, so when you're flying blind without any indicator words, you can fall back on this trend.

Incorrect. This is a premise supporting the conclusion that planting these crops is unwise.

Incorrect. This is a premise supporting the intermediate conclusion.

Incorrect. This is a premise that's thrown into the premise supporting the intermediate conclusion.