Examkin

Question

Difficulty: Very hardIdentifying Unstated Assumptions

Consider the following argument:

A regional agricultural authority plans to mitigate groundwater depletion by offering financial subsidies to farmers who replace water-intensive flood irrigation systems with high-efficiency drip irrigation. The authority argues that because drip irrigation reduces per-acre water consumption by 30 percent, implementing this subsidy program will lead to a net reduction in total agricultural groundwater extraction across the region.

Statement: The agricultural authority's argument relies on the unstated assumption that farmers receiving the subsidies will not expand their total irrigated acreage using the water volume saved through drip irrigation.

Answer: Answer

Answer

The statement is True. The argument relies on the unstated assumption that farmers receiving subsidies will not expand their total irrigated acreage using the conserved water.
The statement accurately identifies a necessary unstated assumption. The author leaps from a per-acre efficiency gain (a 30% reduction per acre) to a regional aggregate reduction (net decrease in total groundwater extraction). For this claim to hold, total irrigated acreage must not expand to absorb the conserved water. Applying the Negation Test shows that if farmers do expand their acreage using the saved water, the conclusion collapses.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Deconstruct the core argument into premises and conclusion
Premise: Drip irrigation reduces per-acre water consumption by 30 percent.
Premise: Subsidies will incentivize farmers to switch from flood to drip irrigation.
Conclusion: The subsidy program will lead to a net reduction in total agricultural groundwater extraction across the region.
Identifying the explicit claims reveals the structural gap between per-acre efficiency and total regional consumption.
2
Identify the logical gap between the premise and the conclusion
The premise concerns rate/efficiency (water consumption per acre), whereas the conclusion asserts an outcome regarding total volume (total regional extraction).
Total volume extracted is a function of both rate per acre and total acreage irrigated (Total=Rate×AcresTotal = Rate \times Acres).
3
Apply the Negation Test to evaluate the assumption
Negated statement: Farmers receiving subsidies WILL expand their total irrigated acreage using the saved water volume.
Impact: If farmers increase their irrigated acreage using the 30% saved water, aggregate regional groundwater extraction will not drop, invalidating the conclusion.
A statement is a necessary unstated assumption if its logical negation invalidates the argument's conclusion.

Key Concept

Identifying Unstated Assumptions (Per-Unit Efficiency vs. Total Aggregate Volume Gap)
Rate this question

Topics

Identifying Unstated Assumptions

More questions from this topic