PrepTest 154

Incorrect. "Not all" is very weak quantification, which should always make you suspicious in a Sufficient Assumption question, where we anticipate the correct answer will be strong. This answer choice only tells us that there's at least one poet in the world who doesn't use metaphor. Not particularly helpful in determining anything about Cummings.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen with Sufficient Premise

Stimulus Summary:
The poet E. E. Cummings opposed regimentation and standardization, but at least one of these was critical to his work. Metaphor ==> literal language, and literal language ==> regimentation.

Answer Anticipation:
We've got a nice chain of conditional reasoning in the stimulus, which allows us to draw the transitive conclusion that metaphor ==> regimentation. Like many Sufficient Assumption questions, what's missing is a term present only in the conclusion: the work of E.E. Cummings. We have enough information here to know that if E.E. Cummings used metaphor as an essential part of his work, then regimentation was an essential part of his work. But we don't know whether or not he used metaphor! Expect the correct answer choice to tell us that he did.

Answer Explanation:
Nice and strong with "was essential," and nice and specific, addressing Cummings directly. This tells us absolutely that metaphor was an essential part of the work in question, which means that literal language was used, which means that regimentation was an essential part of the work.

Key Takeaway:
Sometimes the biggest challenge involved in solving a question is in the language, not the logic. This is actually pretty simple logically: identify the question type, anticipate strong logical force in the correct answer choice, and consider only the answer choices that could connect the premises to the conclusion. If you get bogged down in the complexity of terms like "regimentation" and "literal language," you risk getting a logically simple question wrong. Worry less about understanding the specific nouns used, and more about the structure of the argument.

Incorrect. This is the converse of a premise, which is a moderately common form of trap answer for SA questions. We already know that there can be no metaphor without literal language. It doesn't help us figure out whether or not E.E. Cummings relied on regimentation if we simply add that there can also be no literal language without metaphor.

Incorrect. At first glance this feels related to the conclusion in the stimulus, but it's really not. Just knowing that poetry itself can't be regimented or standardized doesn't tell us whether anything that is essential to poetry—like, say, metaphor—requires something regimented—like, say, literal language. It's trying to answer the wrong question.

Incorrect. If true, this would weaken, rather than prove, the argument in the stimulus. If E.E. Cummings didn't use literal language, then we can take the contrapositive of the first premise and get NOT literal language ==> NOT metaphor, meaning our boy didn't use metaphor at all. That would leave us without any evidence that either regimentation or standardization was essential to E.E.'s work.