Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Evaluating Argument Strength Questions and Answers 4 — Questions and Answers
Question 1: Statement: 'Should the US mandate electric vehicles by 2035?' Argument: 'No, because electric cars are a different color than gasoline cars.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Strong, because consumer aesthetics drive market adoption
- Weak, because vehicle color is entirely irrelevant to the policy question (Correct answer)
- Strong, because appearance affects resale value
- Weak, because color preferences vary by region
Correct answer: Weak, because vehicle color is entirely irrelevant to the policy question
Vehicle color has no bearing on whether an EV mandate is sound policy, making this argument clearly weak.
Question 2: Statement: 'Should the federal minimum wage be raised to $20 per hour?' Argument: 'Yes, because workers earning below a living wage often rely on public assistance programs, shifting costs to taxpayers.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Weak, because public assistance is a separate budget issue
- Strong, because it highlights a direct fiscal consequence relevant to taxpayers and policy (Correct answer)
- Weak, because minimum wage increases cause inflation
- Strong, but only in states with a high cost of living
Correct answer: Strong, because it highlights a direct fiscal consequence relevant to taxpayers and policy
This argument is strong because it provides a concrete, relevant consequence—taxpayer burden—that directly supports the case for a higher wage.
Question 3: Statement: 'Should social media platforms be legally liable for user-posted misinformation?' Argument: 'No, because social media CEOs are already very wealthy and shouldn't be punished further.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Strong, because executive accountability shapes corporate behavior
- Weak, because the wealth of executives is irrelevant to platform liability policy (Correct answer)
- Strong, because punitive measures deter innovation
- Weak, because CEOs are not personally sued under liability law
Correct answer: Weak, because the wealth of executives is irrelevant to platform liability policy
The personal wealth of executives is irrelevant to whether a platform should bear legal responsibility for the content it hosts.
Question 4: Statement: 'Should the US expand nuclear energy production?' Argument: 'Yes, because nuclear power produces large amounts of electricity with near-zero carbon emissions during operation.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Weak, because nuclear waste is a significant problem
- Strong, because it directly addresses a key advantage relevant to energy and climate policy (Correct answer)
- Weak, because nuclear plants are expensive to build
- Strong, but only if existing plants are upgraded first
Correct answer: Strong, because it directly addresses a key advantage relevant to energy and climate policy
High electricity output with near-zero operational emissions is a substantive, relevant reason that directly supports expanding nuclear energy.
Question 5: Statement: 'Should US colleges be required to admit students without considering standardized test scores?' Argument: 'No, because my grandfather scored very highly on the SAT and it helped him get into a good school.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Strong, because personal experience reflects real outcomes
- Weak, because one anecdote is not a substantive policy reason (Correct answer)
- Strong, because family educational history is relevant to admissions policy
- Weak, because the grandfather's school may have dropped test requirements
Correct answer: Weak, because one anecdote is not a substantive policy reason
A single personal anecdote is not a strong argument; it lacks the breadth and objectivity needed to support a national admissions policy.
Question 6: Statement: 'Should the US government fund universal pre-kindergarten programs?' Argument: 'Yes, because research consistently shows that high-quality early childhood education improves long-term academic outcomes and reduces achievement gaps.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Weak, because pre-K funding competes with K-12 resources
- Strong, because it cites consistent research linking the program to significant, lasting educational benefits (Correct answer)
- Weak, because outcomes depend on program quality
- Strong, but only in low-income school districts
Correct answer: Strong, because it cites consistent research linking the program to significant, lasting educational benefits
The argument is strong because it references consistent research evidence linking the proposal to important, measurable long-term benefits.
Question 7: Statement: 'Should the US implement a four-day workweek by law?' Argument: 'No, because Fridays are a popular day for business meetings and a shorter week would disrupt scheduling.' Is this argument strong or weak?
- Strong, because meeting disruption causes measurable productivity loss
- Weak, because scheduling adjustments are trivial adaptations that do not address the core merits of the policy (Correct answer)
- Strong, because business routines are protected by contract law
- Weak, because remote work has already eliminated Friday meetings
Correct answer: Weak, because scheduling adjustments are trivial adaptations that do not address the core merits of the policy
Scheduling inconvenience is a minor, easily adaptable concern that fails to address the substantive economic and labor implications of a four-day workweek law.
Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Evaluating Argument Strength Questions and Answers 4
Statement: 'Should the US mandate electric vehicles by 2035?' Argument: 'No, because electric cars are a different color than gasoline cars.' Is this argument strong or weak?