Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: OrtaRuling Out Alternate Explanations (Defender)

Read the following argument:

Recently, a major commercial airline switched from standard aluminum cargo containers to containers made from a newly developed carbon composite. In the first year of using the composite containers, the airline reported a 12 percent reduction in overall fuel consumption per flight. The airline's management concluded that the lighter weight of the new composite containers caused the reduction in fuel consumption.

Statement: For the management's conclusion to be logically drawn, the argument must assume that the airline did not simultaneously implement new fuel-efficient flight routing procedures during that same year.

Cevap: Cevap

Cevap

True
The correct evaluation is True. The argument concludes that one specific change (composite containers) caused an observed effect (fuel reduction). For this causal claim to be logically sound, the argument must defend itself against alternative explanations. Asserting that a different fuel-saving measure (new routing procedures) did not occur is a necessary 'defender' assumption.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the structure of the argument.
Premise: New composite containers were introduced, and fuel consumption dropped by 12 percent. Conclusion: The new containers caused the drop in fuel consumption.
Deconstructing the argument is necessary to identify the relationship between the evidence and the conclusion.
2
Identify the type of reasoning being used.
The argument uses causal reasoning based on a chronological correlation (event A happened, then event B happened, so event A caused event B).
Recognizing causal reasoning highlights its inherent vulnerability: the possibility of alternative causes.
3
Evaluate the proposed assumption statement using the Negation Test.
Negated statement: 'The airline DID simultaneously implement new fuel-efficient flight routing procedures.'
The Negation Test determines if an assumption is strictly necessary. If negating the assumption destroys the argument, the assumption is necessary.
4
Determine the impact of the negated statement on the conclusion.
If new fuel-efficient routing procedures were implemented, they provide a strong alternative explanation for the 12 percent fuel reduction, destroying the conclusion that the containers alone caused it.
Because the negated statement destroys the argument, the original statement (ruling out the alternative cause) is a logically necessary defender assumption.

Anahtar Kavram

Ruling Out Alternate Explanations (Defender Assumptions)
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Ruling Out Alternate Explanations (Defender)

Bu konudan daha fazla soru