PrepTest 156, Section 4, Question 17

What we’re looking for

Working the answers

• A
  Correct

  The engineers correspond to the different cultures. They reach their conclusions independently, and they agree that the bridge is safe, just as the cultures agree about honey's benefits. The conclusion then says to accept that same claim unless good evidence contradicts it. Engineers rather than cultures change the subject matter, not the pattern of reasoning.

• B

  The studies agreeing about weight training initially resemble the cultures agreeing about honey. But the argument then introduces a comparison: no other exercise has been shown to be more beneficial. The honey argument doesn't compare honey with another food or treatment. B also moves to a recommendation to exercise with weights, rather than simply accepting the studies' claim unless contrary evidence emerges.

• C

  An independent group isn't necessarily a group whose members each reached their conclusions independently. The scientists could have worked together or influenced one another. C also makes its exception about questionable assumptions, whereas the original makes the exception about strong evidence contradicting the agreed conclusion. These aren't the same structure.

• D

  The critics are independent and agree, so the beginning looks promising. But attending the same night isn't the same as encountering strong evidence against their judgment. The conclusion also shifts from the play not being worth admission to its likely commercial success. To match the original, it would instead tell us to accept the critics' judgment about value unless contrary evidence appeared.

• E

  The physicians don't agree on a diagnosis. That is the opposite of the independent consensus in the original. And Janet's proposed belief that she is healthy isn't a conclusion they all reached. The 'unless new evidence' wording can't compensate for missing the agreement that supports the original argument.