A commercial airline plans to replace its current regional fleet with newer aircraft models that consume 25 percent less fuel per seat-mile, maintaining that this fleet transition will lower the airline's overall annual operating expenses. Consider the following assertion: 'Determining whether global jet fuel prices will rise or fall over the next five years represents a valid application of the Test of Variance to evaluate the argument's conclusion.' Is this assertion true or false?
Answer: Answer
Answer
The assertion is False. Evaluating jet fuel price trends fails the Test of Variance because opposite extreme outcomes (fuel prices rising vs. fuel prices falling) both result in lower fuel expenditures for the new fleet compared to the current fleet, rather than producing opposing impacts on the conclusion's validity.
The statement is false because applying opposite extremes to global fuel price movements (prices rising vs. prices falling) fails to produce opposite logical effects on the conclusion. In both extreme scenarios, an aircraft fleet that uses 25% less fuel per seat-mile will incur lower fuel costs than the existing fleet, thereby failing to test whether the cost-reduction plan succeeds or fails.
Step-by-Step Solution
Key Concept
The Test of Variance requires that opposite extreme answers to an evaluative question yield opposite logical impacts on an argument's conclusion. Variables that shift baseline and proposed options proportionally fail this test because they do not alter the relative validity of the argument.