Evaluating Argument Strength Questions and Answers Flashcards
7 cards from real Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal practice questions. Tap to flip, then mark Knew It or Still Learning — missed cards come back until you master them.
Read the first 7 Evaluating Argument Strength Questions and Answers flashcards as text
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?
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.
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?
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.
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?
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.
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?
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.
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?
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.
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?
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.
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?
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.