Examkin

Question

Difficulty: Very hardStrengthen

Consider the following argument:

Agronomist: The widespread adoption of genetically modified (GM) pest-resistant cotton in Region X has led to a significant decrease in the use of broad-spectrum chemical pesticides. Environmentalists claim that this reduction in pesticide use has allowed populations of beneficial predatory insects, which naturally control secondary pests like aphids, to rebound. However, the recent explosion of the aphid population in Region X's cotton fields demonstrates that the environmentalists' claim is incorrect.

The supplementary statement 'The genetically modified cotton cultivated in Region X produces a unique metabolic byproduct that makes aphids highly toxic to beneficial predatory insects' strengthens the agronomist's argument.

Answer: Answer

Answer

False
The correct answer is False because the supplementary statement actually weakens the agronomist's argument. The agronomist argues that the aphid explosion proves predatory insects did not rebound. However, if the aphids have become toxic to the predators due to the GM cotton, the aphid population would explode even if the predator populations had fully rebounded. By providing an alternative explanation for the aphid explosion that is consistent with the environmentalists' claim, the statement undermines the agronomist's logic rather than strengthening it.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the conclusion and the main premise of the agronomist's argument.
Conclusion: The environmentalists' claim (that predatory insects have rebounded) is incorrect. Premise: There has been a recent explosion of the aphid population.
Deconstructing the argument into its core components is essential before evaluating how new evidence affects the reasoning.
2
Determine the unstated assumption bridging the premise and conclusion.
The agronomist assumes that an aphid explosion is mutually exclusive with a rebound of predatory insects; essentially, if the predators had rebounded, they would have prevented the aphid explosion.
Identifying the unstated assumption reveals the vulnerability in the argument's logic, which is the target for strengthening or weakening.
3
Analyze the supplementary statement to determine its impact on the causal relationship.
The statement reveals that aphids feeding on the GM cotton become toxic to the predatory insects.
Understanding the mechanism introduced by the new evidence is required to see how it interacts with the original argument.
4
Evaluate whether the new evidence strengthens or weakens the agronomist's conclusion.
If aphids are toxic to predators, the aphids would multiply uncontrollably even if predator populations had fully rebounded. This provides an alternative explanation for the aphid explosion that is entirely consistent with the environmentalists' claim, thus severely weakening the agronomist's argument.
Because the statement weakens the argument rather than strengthening it, the claim in the stem is false.

Key Concept

Differentiating between explaining a premise and strengthening an argument's causal reasoning.
Rate this question

Topics

Strengthen

More questions from this topic