PrepTest 114

Incorrect. This answer seems to be dealing with the phrase "widely influential" in the conclusion. However this answer then at best defines that term but it doesn't connect to the premises at all which don't discuss popularity or the public's beliefs.

Incorrect. It doesn't matter to the argument if all governments that censor writings for this reason are totalitarian; it matters if "many" totalitarian regimes do this. This answer is a bit of a reversal and a degree shift from the stimulus.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen with Necessary Premise

Stimulus Summary:
Governments that try to censor immoral stuff end up classifying criticism of the government that threatens their power as immoral. Thus, these governments try to ban writings that reduce public passivity.

Answer Anticipation:
Strengthen with Necessary Premise questions frequently feature new concepts in the conclusion of the argument. When that happens, the argument is jumping from a related concept to that new one, and the assumption of the argument links the two.

Here, the conclusion brings in the new concept of writings that "reduce public passivity" stating that the government will classify them in a way that allows them to be censored. What's the basis for this? That these authoritarian governments attempt to ban writings that they believe threaten their power.

So the argument is assuming a connection between those two—authoritarian governments believe that reducing public passivity threatens their power. Note that the argument is about the government's perception of these writings, and so the correct answer should reflect that this is about their belief and not necessarily the reality of it.

Answer Explanation:
This answer connects the new concept in the conclusion to the one used to support it in the premises. If totalitarian regimes don't view loss of public passivity as a threat to power, then the stimulus gives them no reason to classify such works in a manner that allows their censorship.

Key Takeaway:
First, always be on the lookout for new concepts in the conclusion of Strengthen with Necessary Premise questions—they're almost certainly a part of the gap in the reasoning, and identifying what they author thinks established that concept will be the other half of the assumption. Second, when a stimulus mentions a subjective view/belief/thought/knowledge, that's relevant to the logic, and you should pay attention to it.

Incorrect. Two issues here. First, it doesn't matter if public passivity is actually related to authoritarian regimes to maintain power, just if they perceive it to be related to it, so this answer is out of scope. Second, this answer is about all regimes, not just totalitarian regimes, so this answer is too broad. Third, public passivity could help regime's maintain power without being necessary to that maintenance, so this answer is also a bit too strong.

Incorrect. The argument doesn't rely on "most" of these writings having the effect just some potentially having the effect (and authoritarian regimes viewing them as having this effect).