Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: ZorStatement and Arguments

Read the policy proposal statement and the two arguments given below.

Statement: Should the central government completely phase out all financial subsidies on synthetic chemical fertilizers and redirect those funds toward expanding national organic farming infrastructure?

Arguments:
I. No, because an immediate and complete withdrawal of chemical fertilizer subsidies without adequate bio-fertilizer supply chain readiness could severely reduce short-term crop yields, jeopardizing national food security.
II. Yes, because continuous reliance on synthetic chemical fertilizers causes progressive soil degradation, groundwater contamination, and long-term ecological damage across rural agricultural belts.

Which of the following options correctly evaluates the strength of the given arguments?

  1. A
    Only argument I is strong
  2. B
    Only argument II is strong
  3. C
    Neither argument I nor argument II is strong
  4. Both argument I and argument II are strongCevap

Cevap

Both argument I and argument II are strong.
The evaluation stating that both arguments are strong is correct. Argument I addresses an immediate, vital national concern regarding food security and short-term yield disruption if subsidies are removed abruptly. Argument II presents a valid long-term ecological and public health justification regarding soil degradation and groundwater pollution caused by chemical fertilizers. Because both arguments provide logically sound, relevant, and non-trivial reasons touching upon distinct facets of the proposal, both must be evaluated as strong.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze Argument I for relevance, logical consistency, and practical significance.
Argument I points out that sudden withdrawal of chemical fertilizer subsidies without bio-fertilizer readiness threatens short-term crop yields and food security.
Food security is a vital national concern, making this a realistic, directly relevant, and strong argument against immediate complete phase-out.
2
Analyze Argument II for relevance, logical consistency, and practical significance.
Argument II highlights that synthetic fertilizers degrade soil health and contaminate groundwater over time.
Environmental sustainability and soil health directly impact long-term agricultural viability, making this a sound, substantive, and strong argument in favor of organic transition.
3
Synthesize the strength of both arguments to select the correct evaluation.
Since both arguments address realistic, major policy consequences supported by sound logic, both are strong.
A strong argument in critical reasoning must be directly connected to the statement, non-trivial, and logically sound.

Anahtar Kavram

Evaluating logical strength of arguments based on relevance, practical outcomes, and absence of logical fallacies
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Statement and Arguments

Bu konudan daha fazla soru