Examkin

Question

Difficulty: HardIdentifying Unstated Assumptions

Consider the following argument: An agricultural technology firm has developed a novel bio-inoculant containing engineered rhizobacteria designed to increase wheat root depth, thereby improving crop drought tolerance. Field trials conducted exclusively in sandy loam soils demonstrated a 25 percent increase in wheat grain yields under severe drought conditions. Based on these trial results, the firm concludes that commercial application of this bio-inoculant across all major wheat-growing regions will reliably protect wheat yields against severe droughts.

Statement: The argument relies on the unstated assumption that the rhizobacteria bio-inoculant will achieve similar root-depth enhancements in non-sandy soil types typical of other major wheat-growing regions.

Answer: Answer

Answer

True. The argument assumes that the performance demonstrated in sandy loam soil during field trials will translate to non-sandy soil types found across other wheat-growing regions.
The argument bases its broad prediction about all major wheat-growing regions on field trials conducted solely in sandy loam soils. To logically connect this specific evidence to the overall conclusion, the author must assume that the bio-inoculant's effectiveness is not restricted to sandy loam soils. Applying the Negation Test demonstrates this dependency: if the bio-inoculant does not enhance root depth in non-sandy soil types, widespread commercial application across all regions cannot reliably protect yields, thereby invalidating the argument.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Deconstruct the argument into premise and conclusion.
Premise: Field trials in sandy loam soils showed a 25% yield increase under severe drought conditions using the bio-inoculant. Conclusion: Commercial application across all major wheat-growing regions will reliably protect wheat yields against severe droughts.
Separating the specific evidence from the broad claim highlights the logical gap between the trial conditions and the global target market.
2
Identify the scope shift between the premise and conclusion.
The premise is restricted to 'sandy loam soils', whereas the conclusion extends to 'all major wheat-growing regions', which contain diverse non-sandy soil compositions.
A necessary assumption must bridge the gap between the tested soil environment and untested soil environments.
3
Apply the Negation Test to the evaluated statement.
Negated Statement: The bio-inoculant will NOT achieve similar root-depth enhancements in non-sandy soil types typical of other major wheat-growing regions. If this negated claim is true, the broad commercial deployment will fail in regions with non-sandy soil, directly invalidating the conclusion that yields will be reliably protected across all major regions.
Because negating the statement destroys the argument's conclusion, the statement is a required unstated assumption.

Key Concept

Identifying Necessary Unstated Assumptions via the Negation Test
Rate this question

Topics

Identifying Unstated Assumptions

More questions from this topic