Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: ZorEvaluating Argument Validity and Test of Variance

To reduce urban air pollution and traffic congestion, the municipality of Ardenville plans to construct a light-rail line connecting its dense outer suburbs to the commercial downtown core. City planners argue that because traveling by light rail generates significantly fewer carbon emissions per passenger-mile than driving a private automobile, building the light-rail system will lead to a net decrease in Ardenville's total commuter-related carbon emissions over the next decade.

Which of the following would it be most useful to determine in evaluating the validity of the city planners' argument?

  1. Whether a substantial proportion of the projected light-rail passengers will consist of individuals who currently commute by walking or cycling rather than by driving private automobiles.Cevap
  2. B
    Whether neighboring municipalities are considering similar light-rail expansion projects within their own suburban corridors during the next decade.
  3. C
    Whether the municipal government will need to raise local property taxes to cover potential construction budget overruns for the light-rail project.
  4. D
    Whether driving a private automobile produces higher carbon emissions per passenger-mile than riding a conventional heavy-rail locomotive.
  5. E
    Whether commuters who switch from private automobiles to light rail will also report lower overall daily stress levels during peak hours.

Cevap

Determining whether a substantial proportion of projected light-rail passengers previously walked or cycled rather than drove private automobiles is most useful for evaluating the argument.
The correct answer directly tests the core assumption of the argument using the Test of Variance. The planners claim that total carbon emissions will fall because light rail emits less per passenger-mile than private cars. However, if the new ridership is drawn primarily from people who currently produce zero emissions by walking or biking, adding a light-rail system will add new emissions to the environment, causing total emissions to increase. Conversely, if riders are drawn almost entirely from car commuters, total emissions will fall. Because extreme answers to this question yield opposite outcomes for the argument's validity, it is the crucial information to determine.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Deconstruct the argument structure
Premise: Light rail produces fewer emissions per passenger-mile than private automobiles. Conclusion: Constructing a light-rail system will decrease Ardenville's total commuter-related emissions.
Identifying the logic leap between relative emissions per passenger-mile and total net emissions.
2
Identify the unstated assumption
The argument assumes that light-rail riders will primarily be drawn from high-emission private automobile drivers, not zero-emission pedestrians or cyclists.
If riders shift from zero-emission modes to light rail, overall emissions will rise despite the light rail being cleaner than automobiles.
3
Apply the Test of Variance to the correct option
Answering 'Yes' to whether riders come from walking/cycling undermines the conclusion (emissions increase). Answering 'No' supports the conclusion (emissions decrease).
Opposite extreme answers produce opposite impacts on the validity of the conclusion.

Anahtar Kavram

Evaluating Argument Validity and Test of Variance
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Evaluating Argument Validity and Test of Variance

Bu konudan daha fazla soru