Soru

Zorluk: OrtaPassage Assumptions and Underlying Premises

Read the passage given below carefully:

'To upgrade the safety of coastal artisan fishing communities facing severe weather disruption, the marine fisheries department proposed subsidizing high-frequency emergency beacons and weather-alert receivers. Policy planners argued that equipping fishing boats with real-time navigational electronics will significantly reduce lost sea days and casualties during unpredictable monsoon storms. However, traditional fishing collectives contend that equipment subsidies alone fail to address safety, as small motorized boats lack the hull stability to navigate sudden high-sea swells regardless of early storm warnings. Therefore, state intervention must prioritize hull modernization grants over navigational electronics if storm mortality is to be meaningfully reduced.'

Statement: The conclusion that state intervention must prioritize hull modernization grants over navigational electronics assumes that early storm warnings are insufficient to prevent casualties if vessels lack the structural stability required to navigate high-sea swells to safety.

Cevap: Cevap

Cevap

True. The argument depends on the necessary underlying assumption that early storm alerts provided by navigational electronics cannot effectively prevent casualties if vessels lack the structural hull stability needed to survive high-sea swells.
The statement correctly identifies a necessary assumption of the passage. The author's recommendation to prioritize hull grants relies on the premise that early warnings from electronics cannot successfully avert casualties unless the vessel possesses sufficient structural stability in turbulent waters.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the author's main conclusion and supporting premise.
The main conclusion is that state policy must prioritize hull modernization grants over navigational electronics subsidies. The premise given is that small boats lack hull stability to handle swells regardless of receiving early warnings.
Establishing the explicit logical link between evidence and conclusion is necessary to discover unstated assumptions.
2
Apply the negation test to the statement.
Negating the statement gives: 'Early storm warnings can effectively prevent casualties even if vessels lack structural hull stability.' If this negated claim is true, warnings could avert disaster (e.g., by ensuring boats stay docked), rendering the argument for prioritizing hull grants over warnings invalid.
If negating an assumption destroys the author's conclusion, that assumption is logically necessary to the argument.
3
Conclude the truth value of the statement.
Since the negated form invalidates the passage's conclusion, the original statement represents a necessary implicit assumption, confirming that the statement is True.
Validates the true/false evaluation against formal critical reasoning standards.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Underlying Assumptions in Policy Arguments via Negation Test
Bu soruyu puanla