Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Evaluating Argument Relevance 2 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Statement: 'Should the US require all new cars to be electric by 2035?' Argument: 'Yes, because electric vehicles produce zero tailpipe emissions, directly reducing urban air pollution.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Strong, because it directly addresses the environmental impact of the policy (Correct answer)
- Weak, because not all cities have air pollution problems
- Weak, because consumers should choose their own vehicles
- Strong, because electric cars are cheaper to maintain
Correct answer: Strong, because it directly addresses the environmental impact of the policy
The argument is strong because it provides a direct, relevant reason tied to the policy's stated environmental purpose.
Question 2: Statement: 'Should public libraries eliminate late fees?' Argument: 'No, because libraries were invented before the internet existed.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Strong, because historical context always matters to policy
- Weak, because the origin of libraries is irrelevant to the fee policy (Correct answer)
- Strong, because tradition should guide library rules
- Weak, because the internet has replaced libraries
Correct answer: Weak, because the origin of libraries is irrelevant to the fee policy
The argument is weak because a library's historical origin has no logical bearing on whether late fees should exist today.
Question 3: Statement: 'Should employers be required to offer paid parental leave?' Argument: 'Yes, because research shows paid leave improves infant health outcomes and reduces employee turnover.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Weak, because not all employees have children
- Strong, because it provides evidence relevant to both societal and business impacts (Correct answer)
- Weak, because parental leave is a personal matter
- Strong, because employers already offer many benefits
Correct answer: Strong, because it provides evidence relevant to both societal and business impacts
The argument is strong because it cites relevant evidence addressing both public health and employer interests.
Question 4: Statement: 'Should cities ban single-use plastic bags?' Argument: 'No, because plastic bags are made from petroleum, which is a fossil fuel.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Strong, because it explains the environmental origin of plastic
- Weak, because stating what plastic is made of doesn't argue against a ban (Correct answer)
- Strong, because fossil fuels are a relevant environmental concern
- Weak, because cities cannot regulate materials
Correct answer: Weak, because stating what plastic is made of doesn't argue against a ban
The argument is weak because identifying the material source of plastic bags does not constitute a reason to oppose a ban.
Question 5: Statement: 'Should high schools require students to pass a financial literacy course to graduate?' Argument: 'Yes, because many adults lack basic budgeting and debt management skills that lead to financial hardship.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Strong, because it identifies a real gap that the policy directly addresses (Correct answer)
- Weak, because financial literacy is a parent's responsibility
- Weak, because not all adults struggle financially
- Strong, because graduation requirements should be strict
Correct answer: Strong, because it identifies a real gap that the policy directly addresses
The argument is strong because it provides a direct, evidence-based reason why the proposed course would benefit students.
Question 6: Statement: 'Should the US lower the voting age to 16?' Argument: 'No, because many 16-year-olds have not yet taken a civics class.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Strong, because civic knowledge is required to vote responsibly
- Weak, because civics classes are not required of adult voters either (Correct answer)
- Strong, because teenagers are less mature than adults
- Weak, because 16-year-olds cannot drive in all states
Correct answer: Weak, because civics classes are not required of adult voters either
The argument is weak because adults are not required to take civics classes to vote, so holding 16-year-olds to that standard is logically inconsistent.
Question 7: Statement: 'Should professional athletes be required to serve as community role models?' Argument: 'No, because athletes are paid to perform, not to mentor, and conflating these roles creates unfair expectations.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Weak, because athletes voluntarily enter the public eye
- Strong, because it draws a relevant distinction between job duties and social obligations (Correct answer)
- Weak, because role models are always beneficial to communities
- Strong, because athletes are overpaid anyway
Correct answer: Strong, because it draws a relevant distinction between job duties and social obligations
The argument is strong because it makes a directly relevant distinction between a professional's contractual role and externally imposed social duties.
Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Evaluating Argument Relevance 2
Statement: 'Should the US require all new cars to be electric by 2035?' Argument: 'Yes, because electric vehicles produce zero tailpipe emissions, directly reducing urban air pollution.' Is this argument strong or weak?