PrepTest 111, Section 3, Question 6

What we’re looking for

Working the answers

• A

  This presents taking mathematics as something the students at this school do, then applies that general rule to a student. There is no range of subjects that different students could supply collectively. Compare 'the students take math' with 'the student body takes courses in many different fields.' The latter can describe combined variety without giving each student that variety. A lacks that feature.

• B
  Correct

  The editorial board corresponds to the student body, and Louise corresponds to Miriam. The board as a group has written on many legal issues, just as the student body as a group studies many disciplines. The conclusion then gives that breadth to one member.

  But perhaps Louise writes only about tax law, while other members write about other subjects. Together they could cover many legal issues without Louise personally doing so. That's the same reason the university's variety doesn't establish the variety of Miriam's courses.

• C

  This starts with the component parts and moves to the whole bulldozer. Our argument moves from the whole student body to one student. Also, heavy physical parts can combine into a heavy machine without the problematic transfer of variety we saw here. It doesn't repeat the inference about what one member has done.

• D

  This has a different gap. We know older cars need frequent oil changes, but that doesn't establish what a new car needs. New cars could also need frequent changes. D goes from a rule about one category to an unsupported claim about another category; it doesn't transfer a group's combined activity to a member.

• E

  This goes from individual cells to the brain as a whole. The original goes from the whole group to one individual. Both concern parts and wholes, but that shared topic isn't enough. E makes the transfer in the opposite direction.