Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Evaluating Argument Strength Questions and Answers 3 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Statement: 'Should the US government ban single-use plastics?' Argument: 'No, because people have always used disposable items and change is uncomfortable.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Strong, because tradition matters in policy decisions
- Weak, because discomfort with change is not a substantive policy reason (Correct answer)
- Strong, because cultural habits must be respected
- Weak, because banning plastics is unconstitutional
Correct answer: Weak, because discomfort with change is not a substantive policy reason
An argument based on discomfort with change is emotional rather than logical, making it weak by Watson-Glaser standards.
Question 2: Statement: 'Should US companies be required to offer paid parental leave?' Argument: 'Yes, because studies show paid leave increases employee retention and reduces recruitment costs.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Weak, because the statement is about workers, not company costs
- Strong, because it provides a concrete, relevant benefit tied to business outcomes (Correct answer)
- Weak, because retention data varies by industry
- Strong, but only if the studies are from the last five years
Correct answer: Strong, because it provides a concrete, relevant benefit tied to business outcomes
This argument is strong because it directly supports the proposal with evidence of a measurable, important benefit.
Question 3: Statement: 'Should the voting age in the US be lowered to 16?' Argument: 'No, because 16-year-olds cannot yet rent a car.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Strong, because legal rights should be consistent across age groups
- Weak, because the inability to rent a car is irrelevant to civic capacity (Correct answer)
- Strong, because age-based laws must align
- Weak, because car rental policies are set by private companies
Correct answer: Weak, because the inability to rent a car is irrelevant to civic capacity
Car rental age restrictions are a minor, unrelated point that does not address whether 16-year-olds can make informed civic decisions.
Question 4: Statement: 'Should US schools be required to teach financial literacy?' Argument: 'Yes, because adults who lack financial knowledge are more likely to accumulate high-interest debt and face bankruptcy.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Weak, because financial education belongs at home
- Strong, because it identifies a significant, direct consequence of the absence of financial education (Correct answer)
- Weak, because bankruptcy rates are influenced by many factors
- Strong, but only if financial literacy improves test scores
Correct answer: Strong, because it identifies a significant, direct consequence of the absence of financial education
The argument is strong because it provides a direct, important societal consequence that the proposed policy would address.
Question 5: Statement: 'Should the US require all citizens to vote?' Argument: 'No, because forcing people to vote violates their freedom to abstain as a form of political expression.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Weak, because voter turnout is more important than individual freedom
- Strong, because it identifies a direct conflict with a fundamental civil liberty (Correct answer)
- Weak, because most democracies require voting
- Strong, but only for citizens who are politically informed
Correct answer: Strong, because it identifies a direct conflict with a fundamental civil liberty
The argument is strong because it raises a substantive concern about civil liberties that is directly relevant to a compulsory voting law.
Question 6: Statement: 'Should the US increase taxes on sugary beverages?' Argument: 'Yes, because sugary drinks taste bad anyway, so people won't miss them.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Strong, because reduced demand supports the tax policy
- Weak, because the claim about taste is subjective and irrelevant to public health policy (Correct answer)
- Strong, because consumer preference matters in tax design
- Weak, because the government should not regulate taste
Correct answer: Weak, because the claim about taste is subjective and irrelevant to public health policy
Claiming that sugary drinks taste bad is a personal, irrelevant opinion that provides no substantive reason to support a tax policy.
Question 7: Statement: 'Should employers be prohibited from asking about salary history during hiring?' Argument: 'Yes, because salary history perpetuates pay gaps by anchoring new offers to previously lower wages earned due to discrimination.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Weak, because salary history is standard business practice
- Weak, because wage gaps are caused by many other factors
- Strong, because it directly identifies a mechanism by which the practice causes measurable harm (Correct answer)
- Strong, but only in industries with documented pay disparities
Correct answer: Strong, because it directly identifies a mechanism by which the practice causes measurable harm
The argument is strong because it explains a specific, causal mechanism linking salary history inquiries to perpetuating pay inequality.
Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Evaluating Argument Strength Questions and Answers 3
Statement: 'Should the US government ban single-use plastics?' Argument: 'No, because people have always used disposable items and change is uncomfortable.' Is this argument strong or weak?