Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: OrtaStrengthen

Marine biologist: In the coastal waters of Mako Bay, the overall density of kelp forests has decreased by nearly 30% over the past five years. During this exact same timeframe, the population of purple sea urchins, which aggressively graze on kelp, has doubled. It is clear that the surging purple sea urchin population is responsible for the decline of the kelp forests.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the marine biologist's argument?

  1. In sections of Mako Bay where researchers successfully prevented purple sea urchin populations from increasing, the density of kelp forests remained stable over the past five years.Cevap
  2. B
    Industrial runoff recently introduced into Mako Bay contains chemicals known to severely stunt the growth of native kelp.
  3. C
    Whenever kelp forest density decreases by 30 percent in a marine ecosystem, the population of sea urchins in that ecosystem will subsequently double.
  4. D
    While the percentage of kelp lost in Mako Bay is substantial, the total number of surviving kelp plants still vastly outnumbers the population of purple sea urchins.
  5. E
    Purple sea urchins are capable of adapting their diet to consume various types of algae when their primary food source becomes scarce.

Cevap

The statement showing that kelp forests remained stable in areas where sea urchins did not increase.
The marine biologist concludes that an increase in sea urchins caused the decline in kelp based merely on the fact that both events happened concurrently. A highly effective way to strengthen a causal conclusion is to demonstrate that when the purported cause is removed or absent, the effect is also absent. The correct option provides a control scenario within the same environment: in areas where the urchin population did not grow, the kelp did not decline. This strongly supports the idea that the urchins are indeed responsible.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the argument's premises and main conclusion.
Premise: Kelp decreased by 30% while urchins doubled. Conclusion: The urchin increase caused the kelp decrease.
Understanding the structure is required to evaluate what would bolster the argument's logic.
2
Determine the type of reasoning used in the argument.
The argument uses causal reasoning based on a correlation (two things happening at the same time).
Causal arguments have specific vulnerabilities and standard ways to be strengthened.
3
Anticipate what kind of evidence would strengthen this causal claim.
Evidence could eliminate an alternate cause, show that when the cause is absent the effect is absent, or show that the cause and effect always occur together.
Pre-phrasing helps quickly identify the correct structural match among the options.
4
Evaluate the options against the anticipated strengtheners.
The option describing sections of the bay where urchins were kept from increasing and kelp remained stable perfectly matches the 'cause absent, effect absent' method.
This isolates the variable (urchin population) to demonstrate its direct impact on the kelp, ruling out bay-wide environmental factors.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Causal Arguments
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Strengthen

Bu konudan daha fazla soru