Question

Difficulty: MediumIdentifying Intermediate and Subsidiary Conclusions

Read the critical reasoning argument below and complete the statement by identifying the claim that serves as the intermediate (subsidiary) conclusion.

Answer:Argument:
To mitigate shoreline degradation, environmental engineers recommend deploying artificial kelp reefs off coastal cliffs. Because artificial kelp disrupts high-energy wave kinetic power without interfering with natural sediment transport, installing these reefs significantly reduces cliff erosion rates. Consequently, coastal municipalities can protect vulnerable seaside infrastructure without incurring the massive capital costs associated with concrete seawall construction. Therefore, municipal budgets allocated for shoreline defense should be directed primarily toward artificial kelp reef projects.

Analysis:
In the argument above, the claim that functions as the intermediate (subsidiary) conclusion is '【coastal municipalities can protect vulnerable seaside infrastructure without incurring the massive capital costs associated with concrete seawall construction】'.

Answer

The intermediate conclusion is the assertion that coastal municipalities can protect vulnerable seaside infrastructure without incurring the massive capital costs associated with concrete seawall construction.
The claim stating that coastal municipalities can protect infrastructure without incurring massive seawall construction costs functions as an intermediate conclusion. It is logically derived from the premise that artificial kelp significantly reduces cliff erosion rates, and it is subsequently used to justify the main conclusion that municipal budgets should be directed primarily toward artificial kelp projects.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Locate the main conclusion of the argument.
The final sentence ('Therefore, municipal budgets allocated for shoreline defense should be directed primarily toward artificial kelp reef projects') is the ultimate policy recommendation and main conclusion.
It is signaled by 'Therefore' and represents the primary claim that all other statements aim to support.
2
Identify the foundational premises (raw evidence).
The claims detailing how artificial kelp disrupts wave energy without interfering with sediment transport and how reefs reduce erosion rates act as foundational premises.
These statements provide factual/scientific premises establishing the mechanics and physical effectiveness of the technology.
3
Identify the intermediate claim that bridges the premises and the main conclusion.
The statement 'coastal municipalities can protect vulnerable seaside infrastructure without incurring the massive capital costs associated with concrete seawall construction' is inferred from the erosion reduction premise and subsequently serves as the justification for the main financial recommendation.
A claim that is supported by basic premises and in turn acts as a premise for the final conclusion is, by definition, an intermediate (subsidiary) conclusion.

Key Concept

Distinguishing intermediate (subsidiary) conclusions from foundational premises and main conclusions
Rate this question