Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: OrtaIdentifying Main Conclusions

Consider the following argument:

Although recent federal initiatives allocate substantial subsidies for constructing domestic semiconductor manufacturing facilities, establishing local foundries will not eliminate supply chain vulnerabilities because critical refined inputs such as ultra-pure neon and silicon remain concentrated in overseas processing hubs. Therefore, onshore fabrication capacity by itself cannot guarantee supply chain resilience. Consequently, trade officials must prioritize multilateral raw-material access agreements rather than depending exclusively on domestic manufacturing subsidies.

True or False: The statement 'onshore fabrication capacity by itself cannot guarantee supply chain resilience' functions as the author's ultimate main conclusion in the argument.

Cevap: Cevap

Cevap

False. The statement functions as an intermediate conclusion that supports the ultimate main conclusion regarding multilateral raw-material access agreements.
The evaluated statement is an intermediate conclusion used by the author to justify the primary recommendation that trade officials prioritize multilateral raw-material access agreements.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the logical flow and structural role of each claim in the passage.
The fact about overseas raw-material concentration acts as a supporting premise. From this premise, the author derives that onshore fabrication alone cannot guarantee resilience. Finally, this point is used to justify why trade officials must prioritize multilateral raw-material agreements.
Tracing support relationships reveals which statements serve as evidence and which serve as conclusions.
2
Determine whether the target statement is the ultimate conclusion or an intermediate step.
Because the target statement ('onshore fabrication capacity by itself cannot guarantee supply chain resilience') supports the final recommendation introduced by 'Consequently', it functions as a stepping stone rather than the final destination of the argument.
A claim that receives support from premises but gives support to a primary recommendation is an intermediate conclusion.

Anahtar Kavram

Distinguishing Main Conclusions from Intermediate Conclusions
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Identifying Main Conclusions

Bu konudan daha fazla soru