Many of the presidents and

Answer choices

1. A

   Too Specific: most Unknown Comparison0% picked this

   Scholars and diplomats have more experience in foreign affairs than most presidents and prime ministers

   We don't have any way to judge scholars and diplomats collectively vs. more than 50% of presidents / prime ministers, in order to rank who has more experience. The fact that many (at least 5 or so) presidents / prime ministers had no prior experience doesn't tell us that this is true of most presidents / prime ministers.

   0%
2. B

   Correct74% picked this

   Prior experience in foreign affairs is neither a sufficient nor a necessary condition for a president or prime minister to

   Why this is right

   This is actually a weak claim, since calling something sufficient or necessary is a very strong claim. How do you prove X is not sufficient for Y? A case where X is true but Y is not How do you prove X is not necessary for Y? A case where Y is true but X is not Do we have an example where people have successful foreign policy, even though they don't have prior experience? Sure, the first sentence tells us about some and the 2nd sentence implies that prior experience isn't necessary as well, since three traits (none of which involve prior experience) are said to be sufficient to enable success. Do we have an example where people have prior experience in foreign policy, but don't have successful foreign policy? Yes, but weirder. The last sentence is saying that if you had prior experience, but lacked all three of the traits from the second sentence, then it would be of little value to you. If prior experience were sufficient, then prior experience alone would guarantee a successful foreign policy. If they're saying it's of little value, then it's not guaranteeing successful foreign policy, and thus it's not sufficient.

   Skill tested: Must be True · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   74%
3. C

   Too Strong: Necessary Contradicted4% picked this

   Prior experience in foreign affairs is a necessary but not sufficient condition for a president or prime minister to

   Prior experience is definitely not necessary, because the first sentence tells us that many leaders have had successful foreign policy even though they had no prior experience in foreign affairs.

   4%
4. D

   Too Strong: Each Necessary22% picked this

   An acute political sense, a disciplined temperament, and a highly developed ability to absorb and retain information are each necessary conditions for a president

   The 2nd sentence tells us that collectively these three traits are sufficient to give anyone a chance at successful foreign policy. The 3rd sentence tells us that collectively if they're missing, prior experience will be of little value. But this answer is saying individually if any of these three is missing, then it's impossible to have successful foreign policy, and the passage definitely did not convey that strong an idea.

   22%
5. E

   Unsupported Comparison0% picked this

   A president or prime minister with years of experience in foreign affairs will have a more successful foreign policy than one who does

   The paragraph overall makes it seem like foreign policy experience isn't that crucial. Many succeed without it. If you have a certain magic trio of traits, you don't need it. It's possible that the experience would even be of much value to you, if you were lacking all three traits. So since foreign policy experience seems to not have any strong connection to success (from what we've been told) we have no reason to think that an experienced leader would be a more successful leader when it comes to foreign policy.

   0%