Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumStatement and Arguments

Analyze the given proposition and determine the logical strength of the accompanying arguments.

Proposition: Should the national administration mandate continuous biometric tracking for all public sector employees to monitor their exact physical location during official working hours?

Argument I: Yes, utilizing absolute surveillance coupled with automatic salary deductions for any unauthorized movement is the only effective method to instill discipline in government offices.
Argument II: No, this level of constant tracking represents a severe intrusion into personal privacy and is highly likely to diminish employee morale and workplace trust.

Based on logical reasoning principles, which evaluation is correct?

  1. A
    Only Argument I is a strong argument.
  2. Only Argument II is a strong argument.Answer
  3. C
    Both Argument I and Argument II are strong arguments.
  4. D
    Neither Argument I nor Argument II is a strong argument.

Answer

Only Argument II is a strong argument.
The correct evaluation identifies that only the second argument is logically sound. Argument II presents a highly probable, realistic consequence of the proposed policy—highlighting the negative impact on fundamental privacy and workplace morale. Argument I is logically weak because it proposes a disproportionately extreme punitive measure and falsely assumes this is the 'only effective method' to ensure discipline, which is an absolutist and flawed assumption.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Evaluate the logical structure and proportionality of Argument I.
Argument I uses absolutist language ('only effective method') and proposes an extreme, disproportionate measure ('automatic salary deductions for any unauthorized movement').
In logical reasoning, arguments advocating for extreme administrative actions without proportional justification, or those relying on 'only way' fallacies, are considered weak.
2
Evaluate the direct relevance and realism of Argument II.
Argument II addresses a realistic and direct consequence of the proposed proposition, focusing on fundamental rights (privacy) and organizational consequences (diminished morale).
Arguments that point out substantial, logical, and highly probable impacts of a policy are considered logically strong.
3
Synthesize the evaluation of both arguments.
Since only the second argument is logically sound and proportionate, the correct evaluation is that solely Argument II is strong.
This matches the criteria for evaluating the strength of administrative and policy arguments.

Key Concept

Evaluating the logical strength of arguments based on realism, proportionality, and the avoidance of absolutist fallacies.
Rate this question

Topics

Statement and Arguments

More questions from this topic