Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: OrtaStatement and Arguments

Read the proposed industrial policy and identify the strong arguments.

Statement: Should the state government mandate that all medium and large-scale manufacturing industries transition to 100% renewable energy sources within the next five years?

Which of the following arguments are logically strong? (Select all that apply)

  1. Yes, this transition will significantly reduce industrial carbon emissions and align the state with national environmental sustainability targets.Cevap
  2. No, the substantial capital investment required for a complete infrastructure overhaul within such a short timeframe would financially cripple many domestic manufacturers.Cevap
  3. C
    Yes, the government should immediately shut down and seize the assets of any manufacturing plant that has ever failed to comply with past environmental regulations.
  4. D
    No, because it is an established scientific fact that carbon emissions have no impact on the environment, making any long-term energy transition completely unnecessary.

Cevap

The arguments highlighting the reduction of carbon emissions (positive environmental impact) and the severe financial burden on manufacturers (negative economic impact) are both logically strong.
A logically strong argument must be directly related to the core statement and provide a realistic, substantial reason for or against the policy. The argument supporting the transition correctly identifies a major, direct environmental benefit. The argument opposing the mandate correctly identifies a severe, realistic economic challenge tied directly to the five-year timeframe. Both address the feasibility and impact of the mandate without relying on extreme or illogical assumptions.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the core statement to understand the proposed action and its target.
The statement proposes a mandatory shift to 100% renewable energy for medium/large industries within five years.
Understanding the timeline and scope is necessary to evaluate the relevance of the arguments.
2
Evaluate the first supporting argument regarding environmental targets.
The argument is strong.
It identifies a direct, logical, and substantial benefit (emissions reduction) of the proposed policy.
3
Evaluate the opposing argument regarding capital investment and timeframe.
The argument is strong.
It points out a realistic, severe economic constraint directly caused by the aggressive five-year deadline.
4
Evaluate the remaining arguments for logical fallacies or irrelevance.
The argument demanding asset seizure is an extreme action, and the argument denying the impact of carbon emissions relies on false external assumptions. Both are weak.
Arguments that rely on disproportionate administrative actions or flawed factual assumptions fail the test of logical strength.

Anahtar Kavram

Evaluating the logical strength of arguments based on relevance, realistic outcomes, and avoidance of extreme assumptions.
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Statement and Arguments

Bu konudan daha fazla soru