Examkin

Question

Difficulty: EasyArgument by Analogy

City X successfully reduced traffic congestion by implementing a toll for drivers entering the city center during rush hour. City Y, which is currently facing severe traffic congestion, should therefore also implement a downtown rush hour toll to solve its traffic problem.

Which of the following, if true, most weakens the argument?

  1. Unlike City X, which has an extensive public transportation network, City Y currently lacks any viable public transit alternatives for commuters.Answer
  2. B
    Drivers in City Y are highly motivated to avoid unnecessary driving expenses, just as drivers in City X are.
  3. C
    City X never actually experienced a reduction in traffic congestion, despite initial claims made by city officials.
  4. D
    City Y plans to charge a slightly higher toll fee than City X currently charges its drivers.
  5. E
    Implementing a toll in City Y will take several months of planning and public consultation before it can begin.

Answer

The correct answer is the option stating that City Y lacks public transit alternatives compared to City X.
The correct answer effectively weakens the analogy by pointing out a critical relevant difference (disanalogy) between the two cities. For a toll to successfully reduce traffic, drivers must have an alternative way to commute. Since City X had public transit and City Y does not, the toll is unlikely to produce the same result in City Y.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the argument's conclusion and premises.
Premise: City X reduced congestion with a toll. Conclusion: City Y should implement a toll to solve its congestion.
Understanding the structure is required to evaluate the argument properly.
2
Determine the method of reasoning.
The argument uses an analogy, comparing City Y's situation directly to City X's situation.
Identifying the argument type dictates how to accurately weaken it.
3
Formulate a strategy to weaken the argument.
Look for a relevant difference (a disanalogy) between City X and City Y that suggests the toll will not work in City Y.
An argument by analogy is most effectively weakened by showing that the two cases being compared are fundamentally different in a way that affects the predicted outcome.
4
Evaluate the options against the strategy.
The option stating City Y lacks public transit highlights a critical difference: without alternatives, commuters in City Y must still drive, rendering the toll ineffective at reducing traffic.
This directly attacks the assumption that the two cities are similar enough for the exact same solution to work.

Key Concept

Argument by Analogy
Rate this question

Topics

Argument by Analogy

More questions from this topic