Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumPrinciple Questions

The Heritage Preservation Board rejected a proposal by the historic Symphony Hall to replace its drafty, century-old timber-framed windows with modern, highly insulating composite replicas. Although the board conceded that the replacement would drastically reduce heating expenses and carbon emissions without altering the building's exterior color scheme, it maintained that authentic structural materials of a landmark must not be discarded if they can be repaired, even at greater financial and environmental expense.

Which one of the following principles, if valid, most helps to justify the Heritage Preservation Board’s decision?

  1. A
    Public preservation boards should prohibit any physical modernization of buildings that were originally constructed more than one hundred years ago.
  2. B
    If a proposed modification to a landmark preserves the landmark's exterior aesthetic and lowers energy consumption, that modification ought to be authorized.
  3. An alteration to a historic landmark that replaces authentic physical elements should not be approved if the original elements are capable of being restored, regardless of any resulting operational efficiencies.Answer
  4. D
    A historic landmark's original structural materials should be preserved only when doing so does not impose an excessive environmental or financial burden on the institution.
  5. E
    Environmental considerations should never play any role in administrative decisions concerning municipal properties and public venues.

Answer

An alteration to a historic landmark that replaces authentic physical elements should not be approved if the original elements are capable of being restored, regardless of any resulting operational efficiencies.
The argument concludes that the Symphony Hall's proposal should be rejected because its century-old timber windows can still be repaired, even though replacement would lower heating costs and emissions. The correct principle provides a universal rule: when original landmark elements can be restored, replacements should not be approved despite operational advantages. Applying this rule to the stimulus facts guarantees the board's conclusion.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the stimulus argument to identify the core premises and conclusion.
Premise: Original timber window frames can be repaired, but repairing them costs more and causes higher carbon emissions than composite replacements. Conclusion: The proposal to replace the original timber frames with composite replicas must be rejected.
Principle-Justify questions require identifying the underlying gap between the factual evidence and the normative judgment.
2
Determine the conditional link required to validate the conclusion from the premises.
The argument requires a rule stating that if original components can be restored/repaired, replacing them with non-original materials is prohibited, even if replacement offers superior economic or environmental performance.
The correct principle must provide a sufficient bridge from 'repairable original materials exist' to 'do not permit replacement'.
3
Evaluate the answer choices against the required conditional relationship and scope.
The statement specifying that alterations replacing authentic physical elements should not be approved if the original elements can be restored matches the exact scope and direction of the board's reasoning.
This establishes a sufficient condition that strictly justifies the board's decision without introducing unwarranted extreme claims or conditional reversals.

Key Concept

Identifying a governing normative principle that bridges the gap between factual premises regarding material restoration and an administrative decision to deny a modernization permit.
Estimated Time:1m 15s
Rate this question

Topics

Principle Questions

More questions from this topic