Examkin

Question

Difficulty: HardStatement and Arguments

Read the given statement and the two arguments that follow, then answer the question.

Statement:
Should state governments transition entirely from paper-based land ownership registries to a decentralized blockchain digital ledger for all property transactions?

Arguments:
I. Yes, because an immutable digital ledger provides tamper-proof transaction records, thereby reducing fraudulent land transfers and prolonged civil litigation.
II. No, because complete digitalization without physical alternatives risks disenfranchising rural property owners who lack reliable internet connectivity and digital literacy.

Which of the options below correctly evaluates the strength of these arguments?

  1. A
    Only Argument I is strong
  2. B
    Only Argument II is strong
  3. Both Argument I and Argument II are strongAnswer
  4. D
    Neither Argument I nor Argument II is strong

Answer

Both Argument I and Argument II are strong
Both arguments are strong because they address different essential dimensions of the proposed policy. Argument I focuses on governance efficiency, transparency, and fraud reduction through technological immutability. Argument II addresses critical implementation barriers, digital divide issues, and the risk of disenfranchising vulnerable rural populations. Because both arguments are directly relevant, logically sound, and based on realistic outcomes, both are strong.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Evaluate Argument I for relevance, logical soundness, and tangible justification.
Argument I directly addresses land fraud and litigation with a clear causal mechanism (tamper-proof ledger). Thus, Argument I is strong.
An argument is strong if it is directly related to the statement and provides a logical, non-trivial reason.
2
Evaluate Argument II for relevance, logical soundness, and realistic policy constraints.
Argument II highlights a crucial infrastructure and digital literacy barrier that could lead to rights disenfranchisement. Thus, Argument II is strong.
Valid practical drawbacks or social impact constraints make an argument strong when evaluating policy decisions.
3
Synthesize the evaluation of both arguments.
Since both arguments present sound, realistic, and relevant points from governance and social equity perspectives, both are strong.
A comprehensive policy evaluation recognizes both structural benefits and implementation challenges as valid strong arguments.

Key Concept

Evaluation of Strong and Weak Arguments in Public Policy Statements
Estimated Time:1m 30s
Rate this question

Topics

Statement and Arguments

More questions from this topic