Mark and Julie advance arguments about school vouchers. Each item presents a set
ID: 3458981 • Letter: M
Question
Mark and Julie advance arguments about school vouchers. Each item presents a set of statements, and a conclusion. In each item, the conclusion is underlined. The goal of Items #1-5 is not to determine whether you agree or disagree with each statement or conclusion. But rather, decide if the conclusion follows necessarily from the given statements or if the conclusion contradicts the given statements. If a conclusion follows necessarily, a person who accepts the statements is unavoidably committed to accepting the conclusion. When two things are contradictory, the cannot both be correct. Sometimes, the conclusion neither follows necessarily nor contradicts the given statements.
Considering each item independently of the others, mark Items #1-5 accordingly: a) The conclusion follows necessarily from the given statements. b) The conclusion contradicts the given statements. c) The conclusion neither follows necessarily nor contradicts the given statements.
(1) MARK: Julie reasons that federally & state-funded public schools are failing, and a failing public school system should be replaced with a voucher system. What s/he says is correct, but we should still oppose school vouchers. Public schools aren’t all bad, are they?
a)The conclusion follows necessarily from the given statements.
b)The conclusion contradicts the given statements.
c)The conclusion neither follows necessarily nor contradicts the given statements.
(2) MARK: Moreover, we should oppose school voucher programs because any government program that lacks accountability and oversight should be prohibited. It is clear school vouchers programs would lack such accountability.
a)The conclusion follows necessarily from the given statements.
b)The conclusion contradicts the given statements.
c)The conclusion neither follows necessarily nor contradicts the given statements.
(3) MARK: Some school voucher programs “skim” or select more affluent students, leaving poor and minority students behind. Now there is no debate that our education system should treat all citizens equally. Based on this information, one can see that some school voucher programs should be prohibited.
a)The conclusion follows necessarily from the given statements.
b)The conclusion contradicts the given statements.
c)The conclusion neither follows necessarily nor contradicts the given statements.
(4) JULIE: I agree with Mark that government programs should be held accountable and subject to oversight. And it is true that school voucher programs would lack such accountability. But so do private schools. Therefore, we should implement school voucher programs.
a)The conclusion follows necessarily from the given statements.
b)The conclusion contradicts the given statements.
c)The conclusion neither follows necessarily nor contradicts the given statements.
(5) JULIE: School voucher programs foster a higher quality education through free-market competition. Programs that foster higher quality education should be implemented. It is obvious then that we should implement school voucher programs.
a)The conclusion follows necessarily from the given statements.
b)The conclusion contradicts the given statements.
c)The conclusion neither follows necessarily nor contradicts the given statements.
Explanation / Answer
1. C is correct, this is because Mark is concluding that voucher system needs to be opposed while his premises are about the public school system and he admits tha5that Julie’s argument about public schooling are partially correct. Thus, his conclusion partly supports the premises but it in no way gives a complete or necessarytruth about the public system nor does it wholly contradict the premise about the voucher system.
2. a) The premise against School voucher system presents a necessary condition for the conclusion to emerge and therefore the conclusion follows necessarily from the given statements.
3. a) the conclusion against School voucher system is necessarily conditional upon the inequality built into the system of selection of only a handful of the population and it is therefore rejected by Mark.
4. b) the given conclusion supports implementation of voucher system by making reference to the inequality built within the private education. However, the argument is over government programmes and the conclusion is therefore contradictory to the previous statements.
5. c) the conclusion supports School voucher system but the major premise ( first sentence) does not indicate that all school voucher systems result in higher quality education ( it is of the type ‘ Some S is P’). Thus, it does not present a necessary condition. Moreover, the conclusion is not in any contradiction from the statements of the argument and flows directly from them.
Related Questions
drjack9650@gmail.com
Navigate
Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.