Q13 - While playing a game with a ball

[mshinners]

Question Type:
Match the Principle (Match the Reasoning)

Stimulus Breakdown:
Two people playing ball broke a window. The one who threw it should pay.

Answer Anticipation:
Principle: The situation has two people who could be blamed for something, but one of them is picked because they're a direct cause of the damage.

Correct Answer:
(C)

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) Premise and conclusion mismatch. There aren't two choices to blame. Also, the conclusions don't match (who should pay vs. whether to trust in future).

(B) Conclusion mismatch. The premises don't match up perfectly (no one is at fault), but they're close enough that I'd keep reading. The conclusion, however, is about Gerald, not Linda and Seung, so that definitely doesn't match up.

(C) Bingo. Two people could be blamed for the accident (since they were both in the race), but the person directly responsible ends up getting blamed.

(D) Opposite. I can see an argument that the premise and conclusion match (either the owner or renter could be blamed, and we pick one of them). If that's how you see it, the previous renter is directly responsible for the issue, not the boat owner. This answer would match if Emma was required to pay compensation in the stimulus.

(E) Mismatches abound! There are two people who are taking a risk, but neither is really responsible for the injury. Also, the conclusion is about someone not being blamed, and the stimulus had someone paying recompense.

Takeaway/Pattern: Come up with an abstract principle before heading to the answers to make it easier to find the one that matches up. Write it out if you have to (I usually do).

#officialexplanation