Examkin

Question

Difficulty: HardPoint at Issue and Point of Agreement

Marit: Electric utility providers should be legally barred from remotely adjusting residential smart thermostats during periods of peak power demand. Consumers purchase these devices under the reasonable expectation of personal autonomy over their domestic environment, and overriding consumer settings without real-time affirmative consent constitutes an unacceptable infringement on consumer liberty, regardless of any subsequent billing credits provided.

Corin: Utility infrastructure operates as an interdependent communal network. When extreme weather events precipitate severe capacity deficits that threaten catastrophic regional blackouts, utility operators must possess the legal authority to enact mandatory, temporary thermostat adjustments. Safeguarding the reliability of the entire electrical grid takes precedence over individual preferences regarding immediate indoor climate control.

Statement: Marit and Corin disagree over whether preserving power grid stability during severe capacity deficits justifies utility providers remotely adjusting residential thermostats without consumer consent.

Answer: Answer

Answer

True
The evaluation of True is correct because Marit and Corin commit to diametrically opposed truth values regarding the stated proposition. Marit affirms that individual autonomy prohibits non-consensual remote adjustments during peak demand periods regardless of external circumstances, while Corin explicitly argues that severe grid threats supersede individual preference and grant operators the authority to enact such adjustments.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the first speaker's explicit premise and conclusion
Marit establishes a strict principle that remote thermostat adjustments by utilities without affirmative consent violate personal liberty and should be prohibited, even when compensation is provided during peak demand.
Identifying the first speaker's scope of commitment establishes the benchmark for potential points of disagreement.
2
Analyze the second speaker's explicit premise and conclusion
Corin asserts that communal grid reliability during emergency capacity shortfalls outweighs individual domestic preferences, granting utilities the necessity and authority to mandate temporary adjustments.
Determining the second speaker's stance reveals whether they directly engage with or bypass the first speaker's principle.
3
Apply the two-speaker test to the proposed statement
Marit would answer 'No' (grid stability cannot justify non-consensual curtailment) while Corin would answer 'Yes' (grid stability does justify mandatory curtailment).
A valid point of disagreement requires one speaker to affirm the proposition while the other speaker explicitly denies it.

Key Concept

Identifying a Point of Disagreement via the Two-Speaker Test
Estimated Time:1m 30s
Rate this question

Topics

Point at Issue and Point of Agreement

More questions from this topic