Utopia Verbal Critical Reasoning Test (expert) !full! Site
A) Confuses a change in proportion with a change in absolute numbers. B) Assumes that public defender funding is the only factor affecting conviction rates. C) Relies on anecdotal evidence about individual cases. D) Fails to consider that conviction rates might have risen even more without the funding. E) Takes a correlation between two trends as proof of causation.
Hidden premise: Driving behavior is similar across cities. Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the economist’s argument?
B Rationale: Total cases dropped 15%, but conviction rate rose 8%. Let original cases = 100, original conviction rate = 50% → 50 convictions. New cases = 85, new rate = 54% → 45.9 convictions. Absolute convictions fell (50 → 46). B is provable. A requires counterfactual. C is opinion. D is not stated (harder to win ≠ higher conviction rate). E is unsupported. utopia verbal critical reasoning test (expert)
A) If overall crime rates had not fallen, conviction rates among indigent defendants would not have risen. B) The number of indigent defendants convicted has decreased over the last three years. C) The governor’s conclusion is contradicted by the chief public defender’s evidence. D) Serious cases are more likely to result in conviction than minor cases in Caledonia. E) The additional funding was primarily used for serious felony cases.
A Rationale: The argument’s hidden assumption is that the causal mechanism (charge → less driving) transfers. A attacks the mechanism: without good transit, drivers have no alternative, so reduction may not occur. B is similar but narrower (biking only). C weakens (charge less effective) but less direct than A, which eliminates alternatives entirely. D and E are irrelevant or weaken less. Passage 4 (Principle Application) Principle: An action is morally permissible only if it does not treat another person merely as a means to an end, and it respects their capacity for rational consent. A) Confuses a change in proportion with a
A) The company’s pricing is morally permissible because innovation benefits future patients. B) The company’s pricing is morally impermissible because it treats poor patients merely as a means to fund R&D. C) The company’s pricing is morally permissible only if all patients can rationally consent to the price. D) The company’s pricing is morally permissible because it does not involve coercion or deception. E) The principle does not apply to for-profit companies.
A Rationale: Self-selection (motivated managers) could cause higher ratings regardless of training, explaining the observational study’s effect. Random assignment removes this bias. B would reduce difference, not explain it. C contradicts timeline. D is possible but less direct — and the study claimed no significant difference, not just power issue. E suggests industry difference, but A resolves via selection bias, the classic explanation for observational vs. RCT discrepancy. Passage 3 (Weaken — Expert Level) Economist: In order to reduce traffic congestion, the city council plans to impose a $15 daily congestion charge for driving into the downtown zone between 7 AM and 7 PM. Based on a pilot study in a similar city, such a charge reduced traffic by 18% within six months. Therefore, the plan will likely succeed here. D) Fails to consider that conviction rates might
The governor’s reasoning is most vulnerable to criticism because it:
