Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumStatement and Arguments

Consider the following administrative policy proposal and the arguments formulated regarding its implementation:

Statement: Should municipal administrative bodies mandate that all commercial establishments in major metropolitan cities install solar rooftop systems within two years?

Argument I: Yes, because urban electricity demand is growing rapidly, and solar rooftop integration provides a sustainable supplementary power source that reduces reliance on thermal grid energy.
Argument II: No, because enforcing a uniform mandatory deadline across all commercial buildings without considering structural load capacity, grid interconnectivity, and financial subsidies could lead to widespread compliance failures and operational disruptions.
Argument III: Yes, because solar power is clean, and commercial building owners who do not comply within six months should have their business licenses permanently revoked and face immediate property seizure.

Based on critical reasoning principles, which of the given arguments is/are logically strong?

  1. Argument I is a logically strong argument.Answer
  2. Argument II is a logically strong argument.Answer
  3. C
    Argument III is a logically strong argument.
  4. D
    Neither Argument I nor Argument II is strong.

Answer

The arguments stating that Argument I is strong and Argument II is strong are correct.
The selection confirming Argument I and Argument II as strong is correct. Argument I presents a well-reasoned environmental and resource-management benefit, while Argument II highlights essential administrative, structural, and financial challenges of rapid compliance.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Evaluate Argument I for relevance and logical soundness.
Argument I establishes a direct link between rising urban electricity demand and the supplementary role of solar power, making it a cogent and strong argument.
A strong argument must be realistic, directly connected to the statement, and supported by sound logic.
2
Evaluate Argument II for feasibility and practical constraints.
Argument II highlights legitimate technical, financial, and infrastructural obstacles (such as structural load capacity and grid readiness) that affect policy implementation, making it a strong argument.
Arguments pointing out genuine operational and administrative bottlenecks of a policy proposal are logically valid.
3
Evaluate Argument III for administrative proportionality.
Argument III proposes severe and harsh punitive actions (property seizure and license cancellation within six months) without administrative due process, making it a weak argument.
Arguments advocating extreme or disproportionate punitive measures rather than balanced policy enforcement are logically weak.

Key Concept

Evaluation of Strong and Weak Arguments in Public Policy
Rate this question

Topics

Statement and Arguments

More questions from this topic