Examkin

Question

Difficulty: HardIdentifying Main Conclusions and Final Claims

Read the argument below regarding biotechnology and invasive species management, and match each statement from the text to its corresponding logical role within the overall argument.

Argument: Conservationists frequently propose gene-drive technology to eradicate invasive species on isolated islands. Critics contend that off-target genetic mutations could inadvertently spread to mainland populations, causing ecological collapse. However, recent field trials utilizing self-limiting genetic markers demonstrate that gene drives decay naturally within five generations, rendering widespread spillover biologically impossible. Although monitoring post-release ecosystems remains essential to detect unexpected ecological shifts, the fear of uncontrolled global spread is unfounded. Consequently, environmental agencies should proceed with controlled island deployments of self-limiting gene drives.

Which logical role corresponds to each statement from the argument?

  • Recent field trials utilizing self-limiting genetic markers demonstrate that gene drives decay naturally within five generations.Premise offered as empirical evidence to counter the critics' objection
  • Monitoring post-release ecosystems remains essential to detect unexpected ecological shifts.Concession acknowledging a necessary operational precaution
  • The fear of uncontrolled global spread is unfounded.Intermediate conclusion derived directly from experimental findings
  • Environmental agencies should proceed with controlled island deployments of self-limiting gene drives.Main conclusion and primary policy recommendation of the argument

Answer

The correct pairings match each statement to its structural role: the trial decay finding is an empirical premise; the monitoring statement is a concessionary precaution; the statement that spread fear is unfounded is an intermediate conclusion; and the call to proceed with island deployments is the main conclusion.
The main conclusion of a Critical Reasoning argument is the ultimate claim that the author seeks to prove or recommend. The author presents field trial findings as a supporting premise to establish the intermediate conclusion that global spillover fears are unfounded. That intermediate conclusion, alongside a minor concession regarding monitoring precautions, provides the justification for the author's final claim and main conclusion: environmental agencies should proceed with controlled island deployments.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the structural direction of the argument.
Identified the author's primary goal: persuading environmental agencies to approve island deployments of self-limiting gene drives.
Determining the overall objective separates main claims from subsidiary arguments and supporting data.
2
Differentiate premises, concessions, and intermediate claims.
The five-generation decay finding provides raw empirical evidence (premise). The statement about monitoring admits a ongoing requirement (concession). The deduction that global spread fears are unfounded synthesizes trial findings to address critics (intermediate conclusion).
Each statement supports a different tier of the logical chain leading to the ultimate conclusion.
3
Map each statement to its logical definition.
Statement 1 maps to premise; Statement 2 maps to concession; Statement 3 maps to intermediate conclusion; Statement 4 maps to main conclusion.
Establishes precise alignment between text excerpts and structural definitions.

Key Concept

Identifying Main Conclusions and Structural Roles in Arguments
Rate this question

Topics

Identifying Main Conclusions and Final Claims

More questions from this topic