Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: Çok zorEvaluating Reasoning Flaws

To reduce annual municipal water expenditures during prolonged drought conditions, the city council of Northridge instituted a financial rebate for households that installed smart automated irrigation controllers. Twelve months following the implementation of the rebate program, municipal records indicated that total residential water consumption across the city had decreased by 14 percent. Consequently, the city council concluded that the smart irrigation controller rebate was directly responsible for the reduction in residential water consumption.

Consider each of the options separately and select all that identify logical vulnerabilities or flaws in the city council's reasoning.

  1. It fails to account for alternative explanations, such as regional weather changes or mandatory conservation restrictions, that could account for the decline in water usage.Cevap
  2. B
    It focuses on total residential water usage rather than calculating the net financial savings generated after factoring in rebate administration costs.
  3. It infers that the rebate program caused the overall usage decline without establishing whether the reduction occurred primarily among households that adopted the smart controllers.Cevap
  4. D
    It overlooks the potential for smart irrigation technology to achieve even greater efficiency gains when applied to commercial agricultural lands.
  5. E
    It presumes that households participating in the rebate program were using sub-optimal watering schedules prior to installing the new controllers.

Cevap

The argument contains logical vulnerabilities by failing to account for alternative external causes for the water reduction and by failing to demonstrate that the usage reduction actually occurred among the households that installed the smart controllers.
The correct options properly identify two major flaws in the author's causal claim. First, inferring cause directly from temporal sequence ignores external confounding factors (such as rainfall anomalies or citywide conservation mandates). Second, attributing an aggregate decline in water usage to a specific program requires evidence that the decline occurred within the targeted group rather than among non-participants.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conclusion and supporting premises of the argument.
Premise: Total residential water consumption fell by 14% twelve months after introducing a smart irrigation controller rebate. Conclusion: The rebate program directly caused the reduction.
Isolating the structural components clarifies the causal claim being made.
2
Evaluate the causal jump between the premise and the conclusion.
The argument assumes correlation equals causation without ruling out confounding variables or verifying subgroup participation dynamics.
Temporal succession alone does not establish a causal relationship.
3
Assess each candidate option against the identified logical flaws.
The statements highlighting unaddressed external factors (such as weather or mandatory restrictions) and the failure to attribute savings specifically to participating households both correctly pinpoint logical weaknesses.
Both statements identify critical gaps where the premise fails to guarantee the conclusion.

Anahtar Kavram

Evaluating Causal Reasoning and Confounding Variables
Tahmini Süre:2m 30s
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Evaluating Reasoning Flaws

Bu konudan daha fazla soru