Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Evaluating Argument Strength 2

Question 1

Question: Should public universities be free for all students?
Argument: Yes, because many students cannot afford tuition and drop out before completing their degrees.
This argument is:

Accepted Answer

Strong, because it identifies a real barrier that free tuition would address

Answer

The argument is strong because it directly identifies a significant, demonstrable problem (financial barriers causing drop-out) that the proposed policy would address.

Question 2

Question: Should the voting age be lowered to 16?
Argument: Yes, because 16-year-olds are allowed to drive, and driving requires responsibility.
This argument is:

Accepted Answer

Weak, because driving ability is unrelated to political judgment or civic decision-making

Answer

The argument is weak because it draws an irrelevant analogy — competence at driving does not demonstrate the political knowledge or judgment required for voting.

Question 3

Question: Should employers be required to offer paid parental leave?
Argument: No, because some employees do not plan to have children and would not benefit.
This argument is:

Accepted Answer

Weak, because not every employee benefiting from a policy is not a valid reason to reject it

Answer

The argument is weak because many workplace policies — like disability insurance or sick leave — do not benefit every employee directly, yet are still widely considered justified.

Question 4

Question: Should cities ban single-use plastic bags?
Argument: Yes, because plastic bags are found in oceans and harm marine wildlife.
This argument is:

Accepted Answer

Strong, because it provides an evidence-based environmental harm directly linked to the policy

Answer

The argument is strong because it cites a documented, specific harm (marine wildlife damage from plastic bags) that the proposed ban directly targets.

Question 5

Question: Should all new cars be required to be electric?
Argument: No, because electric vehicles are currently more expensive than gasoline cars.
This argument is:

Accepted Answer

Strong, because affordability is a relevant concern that could undermine the policy's effectiveness

Answer

The argument is strong because cost is a directly relevant practical barrier — if most consumers cannot afford compliant vehicles, the mandate creates real hardship and may be unworkable.

Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Practice Test

Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Practice Test

Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Evaluating Argument Strength 2