Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumStatement and Arguments

Consider the following policy proposal regarding agricultural sector reforms:

Proposal: Should the state government mandate that all state-subsidized crop insurance payouts be determined exclusively by satellite-based AI yield prediction models, entirely replacing manual field inspections?

Evaluate the arguments provided below in response to this proposal. Which of the following arguments are logically strong? (Select all that apply)

  1. Yes, utilizing satellite-based AI models will significantly reduce administrative delays and minimize the potential for localized corruption associated with manual assessments, ensuring faster financial relief for farmers.Answer
  2. B
    Yes, the government must immediately terminate the employment of all manual field inspectors because human assessment is inherently flawed and completely obsolete in the modern technological era.
  3. No, current satellite imaging technologies cannot accurately detect subterranean crop damage or highly localized pest infestations, potentially leading to the unjust denial of legitimate insurance claims.Answer
  4. D
    No, because the government recently invested millions in launching the new AgriSat-9 satellite, which provides continuous 24-hour monitoring of global weather patterns.

Answer

The argument emphasizing reduced administrative delays and the argument highlighting technological limitations regarding subterranean damage are both logically strong.
The correct selections represent strong arguments because they directly address the practical implications of the policy. The supporting argument identifies a clear, realistic benefit of automation (speed and reduced corruption). The opposing argument points out a critical limitation of the proposed technology (subterranean damage) that directly affects the primary goal of fair insurance payouts.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the core proposal.
The proposal suggests replacing manual crop inspections entirely with satellite-based AI models for insurance payouts.
Understanding the exact scope of the policy is necessary to evaluate the relevance of the arguments.
2
Evaluate the argument regarding administrative delays and localized corruption.
The argument is classified as logically strong.
It identifies a clear, realistic, and highly relevant benefit of automation, directly supporting the efficacy of the proposal.
3
Evaluate the argument calling for the immediate termination of all field inspectors.
The argument is classified as logically weak.
It resorts to extreme, punitive administrative action rather than addressing the functional merits of the technology itself.
4
Evaluate the argument concerning the inability to detect subterranean crop damage.
The argument is classified as logically strong.
It highlights a valid, practical limitation of the proposed technology that would negatively impact the primary objective of fair insurance payouts.
5
Evaluate the argument mentioning the recent launch of the AgriSat-9 satellite.
The argument is classified as logically weak.
While potentially a true statement, it fails to logically connect to why the exclusive use of satellites for insurance payouts should be opposed.

Key Concept

Evaluating the logical validity, relevance, and proportionality of arguments responding to a specific policy proposal.
Rate this question

Topics

Statement and Arguments

More questions from this topic