PrepTest 128, Section 3, Question 3

What we’re looking for

Working the answers

• A

  The first two statements fit: planting only daffodils leads to squirrels eating the bulbs, and squirrels eating the bulbs leads to no flowers blooming. Here, “only” describes which flowers Ruth plants; planting that selection is the starting condition.

  But the conclusion starts with the final result, no flowers, and works backward to daffodils. Other things could have prevented flowers from blooming. To match Patricia, A would need to conclude that if Ruth plants only daffodils, no flowers will bloom.

• B

  Starting in early spring leads to being able to plant tomatoes early, which leads to having plenty for canning. Those first two links match the meal, heartburn, and grouchiness. But B then says the final result is absent and draws a conclusion about which earlier action did not occur. Patricia's argument never starts from a missing result; it concludes what will happen if the first condition occurs.

• C

  Maria has two possible starting choices, petunias or geraniums, each leading to its own color. The conclusion preserves those alternatives: purple or red flowers. We don't have one chain in which the first event produces a middle event that produces a final one.

• D
  Correct

  Planting old rose varieties takes the meal's place. A beautiful garden takes heartburn's place. Impressed neighbors take grouchiness's place. The first premise connects roses to beauty, and the second connects beauty to impressed neighbors. The conclusion connects roses directly to impressed neighbors, just as the original connects the meal directly to grouchiness.

• E

  Producing well requires one of two actions, pruning or fertilizing. Bryan wants that result and missed the pruning opportunity, so the argument predicts he will fertilize. That is a choice between alternative actions, not a chain of two guarantees. Wanting the result also doesn't guarantee that Bryan will take the needed action; he might forget the fertilizer too.