Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Evaluating Argument Relevance 4 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Statement: 'Should the death penalty be abolished in all US states?' Argument: 'Yes, because studies have found no consistent evidence that capital punishment deters violent crime more effectively than life imprisonment.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Weak, because crime deterrence is not the only purpose of the death penalty
- Strong, because it directly challenges a major rationale used to justify capital punishment (Correct answer)
- Weak, because violent crime rates vary by state
- Strong, because the death penalty is expensive
Correct answer: Strong, because it directly challenges a major rationale used to justify capital punishment
The argument is strong because deterrence is a central justification for the death penalty, and evidence against it is directly relevant.
Question 2: Statement: 'Should all US citizens be required to vote?' Argument: 'No, because forcing citizens to vote violates the freedom to abstain, which is itself a form of political expression.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Strong, because it identifies a rights-based conflict directly relevant to compulsory voting (Correct answer)
- Weak, because most democracies require voting
- Weak, because low turnout is harmful to democracy
- Strong, because people are too busy to vote
Correct answer: Strong, because it identifies a rights-based conflict directly relevant to compulsory voting
The argument is strong because it directly addresses a constitutional tension at the heart of the mandatory voting debate.
Question 3: Statement: 'Should standardized testing be eliminated from college admissions?' Argument: 'Yes, because the SAT was originally developed to identify military officer candidates, not college readiness.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Strong, because the original purpose reveals a design flaw
- Weak, because the test's original purpose does not determine its current validity for admissions (Correct answer)
- Strong, because military and academic skills are different
- Weak, because not all students take the SAT
Correct answer: Weak, because the test's original purpose does not determine its current validity for admissions
The argument is weak because the historical origin of a test does not determine whether it is currently a valid measure of college readiness.
Question 4: Statement: 'Should ride-sharing companies be required to classify drivers as employees rather than contractors?' Argument: 'Yes, because employee classification entitles drivers to benefits like overtime pay, health insurance, and unemployment protections.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Weak, because drivers prefer the flexibility of contractor status
- Strong, because it identifies concrete protections directly at stake in the classification decision (Correct answer)
- Weak, because ride-sharing companies operate in many countries
- Strong, because all workers deserve equal treatment
Correct answer: Strong, because it identifies concrete protections directly at stake in the classification decision
The argument is strong because it specifies real, relevant legal benefits that the classification change would confer on drivers.
Question 5: Statement: 'Should the US require a national ID card for all citizens?' Argument: 'No, because other countries use national ID cards and still have high rates of identity theft.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Strong, because international evidence is always relevant to policy decisions
- Weak, because identity theft rates abroad may reflect many unrelated factors (Correct answer)
- Strong, because national ID systems clearly fail to prevent identity theft
- Weak, because the US already has Social Security numbers
Correct answer: Weak, because identity theft rates abroad may reflect many unrelated factors
The argument is weak because correlating identity theft rates in other countries to a US national ID proposal ignores many confounding variables.
Question 6: Statement: 'Should pharmaceutical companies be required to cap drug prices?' Argument: 'Yes, because millions of Americans skip prescribed medications due to cost, leading to preventable hospitalizations.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Weak, because some drugs are expensive to develop
- Weak, because hospitals can treat uninsured patients
- Strong, because it links high prices to a direct, measurable public health harm (Correct answer)
- Strong, because drug companies earn excessive profits
Correct answer: Strong, because it links high prices to a direct, measurable public health harm
The argument is strong because it demonstrates a direct causal chain from high drug prices to a concrete, relevant public health outcome.
Question 7: Statement: 'Should animals be banned from use in cosmetic testing?' Argument: 'No, because cosmetic animal testing has been practiced for over 80 years.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Strong, because long-established practices have proven their value
- Weak, because the duration of a practice does not justify its continuation (Correct answer)
- Strong, because changing long-standing rules disrupts the industry
- Weak, because cosmetics are not essential products
Correct answer: Weak, because the duration of a practice does not justify its continuation
The argument is weak because the length of time a practice has existed is not a logical reason to continue it — this is an appeal to tradition.
Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Evaluating Argument Relevance 4
Statement: 'Should the death penalty be abolished in all US states?' Argument: 'Yes, because studies have found no consistent evidence that capital punishment deters violent crime more effectively than life imprisonment.' Is this argument strong or weak?