Public Health Official: To combat the rising rates of childhood obesity, the city should implement a ban on the sale of sugary drinks in all public schools. Similar bans have been successful in neighboring municipalities. While some argue that students will simply purchase these drinks from stores near the schools during the day, our data shows that most students do not leave the school campus during school hours. Therefore, the ban will significantly reduce the overall daily sugar intake of the city's schoolchildren.
Which one of the following is an assumption required by the public health official's argument?
- AThe proposed ban on the sale of sugary drinks is the most effective measure available for reducing the overall daily sugar intake of the city's schoolchildren.
- BEvery student who remains on the school campus during the day currently purchases sugary drinks from the public schools.
- The city's schoolchildren will not completely offset the effects of the school ban by increasing their consumption of sugary drinks from other sources.Cevap
- DThe rising rates of childhood obesity in the city are primarily caused by the consumption of sugary drinks during the school day.
- ENone of the students who currently purchase sugary drinks at school will attempt to buy them from stores near the school during the day.
Cevap
The statement that the schoolchildren will not completely offset the effects of the ban by increasing their consumption from other sources.
For the official's conclusion (that overall daily sugar intake will drop significantly) to hold true, it must be the case that students don't simply replace the banned drinks with sugary drinks from home or after school. When this statement is logically negated—meaning students DO completely offset the ban by getting drinks from other sources—the conclusion that their daily intake will decrease is completely destroyed. This proves the assumption is strictly necessary.
Adım Adım Çözüm
Anahtar Kavram
The Negation Technique involves logically negating an answer choice to see if the resulting statement destroys the argument's conclusion. If it does, the original choice is a necessary assumption.