3.10 - Principle

Let's talk Principle questions. These questions take a couple different forms depending on whether they address an argument.

When we're dealing with an argument, these questions function similarly to Sufficient Assumptions in that we need to find the principle that justifies the argument.

When we're not, we need to find an answer choice that's demonstrated in the passage. For instance, if a passage talked about how it's best to make two stops on the same outing rather than to return home between them, a correct answer choice might be something like the idiom "kill two birds with one stone."

Here's what these questions tend to look like:

• Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the argument's reasoning?
• The pundit's reasoning most closely conforms to which of the following principles?
• The scenario described conforms most closely to which one of the following?

Let's review some examples.

Examples

June 2007 PrepTest, Section 2, Question 7

Here's Question 7 from Test J, Section 2:

Ethicist: The most advanced kind of moral motivation is based solely on abstract principles. This form of motivation is in contrast with calculated self-interest or the desire to adhere to societal norms and conventions.

We're asked to find an answer choice that exhibits this most advanced kind of moral motivation. I'm looking for someone to take selfless action based in lofty ideals, and particularly action that doesn't come with recognition or reward.

My prediction is rewarded in the answer choices. D walks us through a scenario where an employee reports their employer's illegal (yet profitable) practice that's harming the environment because the employee believes protecting the environment always comes before profits.

PrepTest 73, Section 2, Question 6

Next we're working on Question 6 from Test 73, Section 2:

Critic: The criticism of the popular film comedy Quirks for not being realistic is misguided. It is certainly true that the characters are too stylized to be real people. That could be problematic, but in this case the resulting film is funny. And that is the important thing for a comedy.

We're asked to find the principle that, if valid, helps justify the critic's reasoning. The critic seems to suggest that criticism doesn't matter so long as a film succeeds within its genre. For instance, a hokey horror movie that's still really scary would be a slam dunk to this critic.

I'm looking for something like, "Criticism is misguided so long as a film succeeds at the basic goals of its genre."

Boom—score another win for prediction. Answer choice D reads:

Films are successful if they succeed within their genre.

That's for sure the answer. If this was a valid principle, our critic's argument's rock solid.

---

That's it for Principle questions. Next, we're looking at how to solve Parallel Reasoning. Hope to see you there.