Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: OrtaEvaluating Intermediate Conclusions

Construct a logically sound, multi-step argument by placing the following claims in their correct sequential order, starting with foundational premises and building through intermediate deductions to the ultimate conclusion.

  1. 1Global warming increases the stratification of upper ocean layers, which causes surface waters to become more opaque due to prolonged phytoplankton blooms.
  2. 2Because of this increased surface opacity, significantly less sunlight will penetrate down to the ocean's twilight zone in the coming decades.
  3. 3The microscopic photosynthetic organisms that inhabit the twilight zone rely entirely on this filtered sunlight to produce energy and survive.
  4. 4Consequently, the total biomass of these twilight-zone photosynthetic organisms will inevitably decrease as their energy source diminishes.
  5. 5Therefore, since many deep-water fish species depend exclusively on these organisms for food, the populations of these fish will likely experience severe declines.

Cevap

The correct sequence begins with the premise about global warming causing opacity, followed by its direct effect on sunlight, the premise about organisms' reliance on sunlight, the resulting decrease in biomass, and finally the ultimate conclusion regarding fish population declines.
The argument forms a continuous logical chain. It starts with an environmental premise (warming causes opacity). This leads to a first intermediate conclusion (less sunlight). A new premise is then introduced (organisms need sunlight). Combining these leads to a second intermediate conclusion (organism biomass decreases). Finally, another premise is introduced within the last sentence (fish eat the organisms), which leads directly to the main conclusion (fish populations will decline).

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the absolute starting points of the argument that do not depend on other statements.
The statement about global warming causing surface opacity is the independent trigger for the entire scenario.
A logically sound argument must begin with foundational evidence.
2
Locate the immediate logical consequence of the first premise.
The claim that 'significantly less sunlight will penetrate' is the direct result of the surface opacity established in the first step.
Intermediate conclusions are built by drawing immediate inferences from the preceding premises.
3
Identify any additional factual information required to continue the logical chain.
The statement explaining that twilight zone organisms rely entirely on sunlight introduces a new necessary fact.
Before concluding that the organisms will die off, the argument must first establish their biological dependence on the diminishing resource.
4
Determine the consequence of combining the lack of sunlight with the organisms' reliance on it.
The deduction that the biomass of these organisms will inevitably decrease follows directly from the previous two established points.
This acts as a second intermediate conclusion, bridging the gap between the environmental changes and the final impact.
5
Identify the final conclusion that the entire argument builds toward.
The prediction that deep-water fish populations will experience severe declines is the ultimate consequence.
The main conclusion must logically flow from the final intermediate conclusion (the decrease in food source) and encapsulate the author's primary warning.

Anahtar Kavram

Evaluating Intermediate Conclusions
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Evaluating Intermediate Conclusions

Bu konudan daha fazla soru