Utopia Verbal Critical Reasoning Test (expert) «RELIABLE · 2024»

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) 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. utopia verbal critical reasoning test (expert)

The governor’s reasoning is most vulnerable to criticism because it: A Rationale: The argument’s hidden assumption is that

This content mimics the highest difficulty tier (resembling McKinsey PST, GMAT 700+, or Law Admission Test (LNAT) advanced sections). Test Overview | Feature | Detail | | --- | --- | | Test Duration | 30 minutes | | Questions | 24 | | Passages | 4 (250–350 words each) | | Difficulty | Expert (Red Herrings, subtle quantifiers, nested logic, assumption grafting) | | Question Types | 1. Must Be True / Inference 2. Weaken / Strengthen (exceptional nuance) 3. Paradox Resolution 4. Flaw in Reasoning 5. Principle Application | | Scoring | 0–900 scaled (600+ = expert level) | Instructions (as seen by candidate) Each question presents a short passage followed by a critical reasoning task. Do not use outside knowledge. The passage is the sole source of truth. Pay attention to quantifiers (some, most, all, none), modals (must, may, could), and embedded exceptions . For "Weaken" questions, select the option that, if true , most undermines the core logical link — not merely the conclusion’s plausibility. For "Must Be True", the answer must be provable directly from the passage without additional assumptions. Sample Test Module (Expert Level) Passage 1 (Inference & Flaw) Despite increased funding for public defense attorneys in the state of Caledonia, conviction rates among indigent defendants have risen by 8% over the last three years. The governor claims that this proves the additional funding was wasted, since more poor defendants are being found guilty. However, the state’s chief public defender notes that during the same period, overall crime rates fell by 12%, and the number of cases brought against indigent defendants dropped by 15%. She argues that the remaining cases are more serious on average, and therefore harder to win, making the funding justified. Question 1 (Must Be True) Which of the following can be correctly inferred from the passage? C weakens (charge less effective) but less direct

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.

Hidden premise: Driving behavior is similar across cities. Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the economist’s argument?