Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: ZorRole in Argument

Marine Biologist: Proponents of 'rigs-to-reefs' initiatives argue that converting decommissioned offshore oil platforms into artificial reefs enhances regional marine biodiversity. However, systematic ecological surveys reveal that these towering steel jackets merely aggregate existing adult fish populations from nearby natural rocky reefs rather than increasing net reproductive output. Consequently, repurposing these structures inadvertently leaves adjacent natural ecosystems depleted and more vulnerable to environmental disruptions. Coastal regulatory commissions should therefore prohibit petroleum companies from abandoning obsolete platforms in marine sanctuaries.

Which of the following most accurately describes the role played in the marine biologist's argument by the claim that repurposing obsolete platforms inadvertently leaves adjacent natural ecosystems depleted and more vulnerable to environmental disruptions?

  1. A
    It is the primary conclusion of the argument, for which the policy proposal directed at regulatory commissions serves merely as an illustrative application.
  2. B
    It is an unargued factual premise introduced to establish directly that artificial reefs aggregate existing adult fish populations.
  3. It is a subsidiary conclusion that is inferred from survey evidence and serves to justify the argument's main policy recommendation.Cevap
  4. D
    It is a concession acknowledging a valid point made by proponents of rigs-to-reefs initiatives before refuting their overall stance.
  5. E
    It is background context provided to explain why petroleum companies advocate for converting decommissioned platforms rather than dismantling them.

Cevap

It is a subsidiary conclusion that is inferred from survey evidence and serves to justify the argument's main policy recommendation.
The claim that repurposing platforms leaves adjacent ecosystems depleted is derived directly from the empirical premise regarding fish aggregation (marked by the inference indicator 'Consequently') and in turn serves as the primary justification for the concluding policy recommendation (marked by 'therefore'). Thus, it functions as a classic intermediate or subsidiary conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the overall argument structure and identify the main conclusion.
The main conclusion is the normative recommendation in the final sentence: 'Coastal regulatory commissions should therefore prohibit petroleum companies from abandoning obsolete platforms in marine sanctuaries.'
The conclusion indicator 'therefore' and the prescriptive recommendation mark this as the ultimate takeaway of the passage.
2
Determine the relationship between the target claim and the surrounding statements.
The target statement is introduced by 'Consequently,' showing that it is derived from the survey evidence (that platforms merely aggregate existing fish). It then provides the causal mechanism that justifies the main recommendation.
Because the statement is both supported by earlier premises and provides direct support for the main conclusion, it functions as an intermediate (subsidiary) conclusion.
3
Match the functional diagnosis with the corresponding answer choice.
The option stating that it is a subsidiary conclusion inferred from survey evidence and used to justify the main recommendation correctly describes this dual role.
This precisely matches the two-way structural dependency of an intermediate conclusion.

Anahtar Kavram

Role of intermediate (subsidiary) conclusions in multi-layered arguments
Tahmini Süre:1m 35s
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Role in Argument

Bu konudan daha fazla soru