Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: ZorWeaken

Analyze the four arguments below. Match each argument (Left) to the specific piece of new evidence (Right) that most severely weakens its conclusion by exposing its underlying logical flaw.

  • A recent study found that employees who take frequent short walks during the workday report significantly lower levels of stress. Therefore, to decrease overall employee stress, the corporation should mandate daily short walks for all staff.Employees who suffer from high levels of stress are almost exclusively assigned to high-pressure projects that strictly prohibit them from leaving their desks for breaks.
  • The number of traffic accidents involving electric scooters in the city has tripled this year compared to last year. Clearly, riding an electric scooter has become significantly more dangerous for the individual rider.Due to a massive new scooter-sharing program, the total number of miles traveled on electric scooters in the city increased sixfold from last year to this year.
  • A survey of readers of 'Peak Athletics' magazine revealed that 80% of respondents prefer plant-based protein supplements over whey protein. Thus, a vast majority of the general athletic population is shifting toward plant-based diets.Consumers who strictly adhere to plant-based diets are disproportionately more likely to subscribe to fitness and health magazines than athletes who consume dairy-based proteins.
  • The municipal government can either expand the downtown highway system or suffer from continuously worsening traffic congestion. Since expanding the highway would completely exhaust the municipal budget, the city will inevitably suffer from worsening traffic.Several neighboring municipalities with identical budget constraints have successfully eliminated traffic congestion by optimizing their existing bus networks without expanding highways.

Cevap

Argument 1 (stress) matches with the evidence regarding high-pressure project assignments. Argument 2 (scooters) matches with the evidence of the sixfold increase in total miles traveled. Argument 3 (survey) matches with the evidence of subscription bias among plant-based consumers. Argument 4 (traffic) matches with the evidence regarding neighboring municipalities optimizing bus networks.
Each argument contains a distinct, classic logical flaw. The correct counter-evidence directly exploits the specific gap in that argument. The workplace stress argument assumes causality from a correlation, which is weakened by showing reverse causality. The scooter argument confuses absolute numbers with proportional rates, which is weakened by a massive increase in total riders. The magazine survey argument relies on an unrepresentative sample, which is weakened by showing the sample is inherently biased. The traffic argument restricts the possibilities to a false dilemma, which is weakened by demonstrating a successful alternative option.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the workplace stress argument to identify its logical gap.
The argument relies on a correlation-to-causation jump, assuming walks cause reduced stress rather than the reverse.
Identifying the causal flaw directs you to look for evidence that suggests reverse causation or a third variable.
2
Select the evidence that attacks the causal flaw in the stress argument.
The evidence stating highly stressed employees are prohibited from taking breaks perfectly exploits this gap.
It shows that stress levels determine the ability to walk, completely undermining the recommendation to mandate walks to cure stress.
3
Evaluate the electric scooter argument's reasoning.
The argument commits a numbers-to-percentages error, assuming an increase in total accidents means an increase in individual risk (rate).
To weaken a numbers-to-rates argument, you must find evidence altering the baseline or total population.
4
Select the evidence that addresses the baseline for the scooter argument.
The evidence regarding the sixfold increase in total scooter miles directly attacks this flaw.
If use increased 6x but accidents only increased 3x, the danger per rider has actually dropped, destroying the conclusion.
5
Examine the survey argument and the traffic argument.
The survey argument relies on an unrepresentative sample, while the traffic argument relies on a false dilemma (only two options).
Identifying these specific structural flaws makes the remaining matches clear.
6
Match the remaining arguments to their respective weakeners.
The survey argument matches the evidence showing magazine subscribers are disproportionately plant-based (exposing the sample bias). The traffic argument matches the evidence showing bus optimization as a third option (breaking the false dilemma).
Each piece of evidence surgically targets the distinct vulnerability of its paired argument.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying and exploiting specific structural vulnerabilities (flaws) in logical arguments.
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Weaken

Bu konudan daha fazla soru