Q2 - Residents of a coastal community

[mshinners]

Question Type:
Principle Support (Strengthen/Sufficient)

Stimulus Breakdown:
A painting depicts a plot of land, and that painting is part of the artistic/historic heritage of the community. Therefore, the landowner shouldn't be able to change the land.

Answer Anticipation:
As always in this question type, the correct answer will connect the premise and conclusion. Here, expect an answer similar to: If something would damage the artistic/historic heritage of the community, it shouldn't be allowed.

Correct answer:
(D)

Answer choice analysis:
(A) Out of scope. The argument is about preserving the landscape, not a house. The residents are arguing against building a house!

(B) Out of scope. The argument doesn't involve purchasing the land from the landowner who wants to build the house.

(C) Out of scope. The artist is dead and not making any type of request.

(D) Bingo. This wouldn't be a first-round pick because it doesn't 100% justify the conclusion. While that's not necessary for this question type ("most helps" not "justifies completely"), the correct answers have a tendency to go that far. However, this argument relies on history and art impeding on the rights of a landowner, and this answer states that as a valid principle.

(E) Out of scope. The residents aren't trying to change zoning regulations; they're instead appealing to heritage.

Takeaway/Pattern:
For Principle Strengthen questions, the answer will frequently justify the conclusion. However, they don't have to - they can just add information supporting the conclusion.

#officialexplanation