📢 Too many exams? Don’t know which one suits you best? Book Your Free Expert 👉 call Now!
  • google app store apple app store
    • âś–

      Question

      In the question below, a premise is given, followed by

      statements that may or may not weaken the assertion made in the premise. Read the question and answer it as per the individual direction mentioned. The city administration has proposed a ban on all private vehicles in the central business district (CBD) in order to reduce air pollution. The administration argues that this ban will significantly cut down emissions and improve air quality. However, critics argue that unless the administration also improves public transport infrastructure before the ban, the influx of people who depend on private vehicles will overwhelm the existing system. Thus, the proposal must include provisions to increase the capacity and efficiency of public transport before banning private vehicles. Which of the following statements weaken the argument that the proposal must improve public transport before implementing the ban?
      A Similar bans in other cities have successfully reduced air pollution even without major improvements in public transport. Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
      B Traffic congestion in the CBD is caused mainly by commercial vehicles, not private vehicles. Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
      C A recent survey shows that a majority of daily commuters are willing to switch to cycling or walking if private vehicles are banned. Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
      D The administration has already allocated funds to expand the public bus fleet next year. Correct Answer Incorrect Answer
      E None of the above. Correct Answer Incorrect Answer

      Solution

      The argument claims that the proposal must include better public transport before banning private vehicles; otherwise, commuters will overwhelm the existing system. Option C weakens the argument because if most commuters are willing to walk or cycle, the pressure on public transport will not increase significantly. Thus, improving public transport before the ban may not be necessary. Option A is not strong enough because success elsewhere does not guarantee success under the city's specific conditions. Option B is irrelevant because the argument is about pressure on public transport, not the exact source of congestion. Option D actually strengthens the original concern—it suggests improvements are already planned, implying they are necessary. Therefore, C weakens the given argument most effectively.

      Practice Next
      More Strong and Weak Argument Questions

      Relevant for Exams:

      ask-question