PrepTest 145

Incorrect. There is no specific instance of music being only sound. There's also no stated opposing point.

Incorrect. Sentences can be broken into clauses that have different rules. While the statement in question is part of a (run-on) sentence that includes the conclusion, the sentence shifts gears with the "for" to a premise.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Argument Structure

Stimulus Summary:
Some background is given on emotions and social context, before the argument shifts gears to a conclusion about music (starting with a statement that we can ignore because it starts with "even if"), and then goes into a supporting premise that leads to an intermediate conclusion.

Answer Anticipation:
We stripped this stimulus of its content because it's a bunch of wishy washiness that's just going to distract from the structure of the argument, which is what we focused on. It's like seeing the matrix—we're focused on the role of statements instead of the argument itself!

Here, the initial statements—if you can make heads and tails of it—comes before a shift in topic in a conclusion. "So" tells us we've got a conclusion, but then it brings up music, which wasn't addressed, so the support for this conclusion must come after this statement. Additionally, the conclusion has an "even if" in it which we can largely disregard ("even if" essentially says that it doesn't matter if the following clause is or isn't true).

After it, we get a "for" statement which is a premise supporting the preceding statement (and this is the statement in question), and that leads straight into its own conclusion ("and, therefore . . . "), which must be an intermediate conclusion—the structure here means that the premise is supporting this statement, and therefore both must go back and support the statement about music, which is the main point.

So the statement in question is a premise supporting the intermediate conclusion of the argument.

Answer Explanation:
While this answer isn't as specific as it could have been, it highlights the statement in question as one premise in support of the conclusion, which does reflect its role.

Key Takeaway:
If you're dealing with an Argument Structure question, don't get wrapped up in the logic of it—or even the topic, if you're struggling! The content here is rather dense, but the structure is present through indicator words without you needing to understand the intricacies of what the Theorist is arguing.

Incorrect. While the statement in question may be necessary for the argument to work (we didn't think too much about that), the argument itself never claims it's necessary, so this answer is incorrect.

Incorrect. It's a premise that supports the conclusion, and there's no claim anywhere that something must be rejected, so this answer doesn't reflect anything in the argument.