Self-study
The government has spent heavily to clean groundwater contaminated by toxic chemical spills. ███ ███ ████ ███ █████ ████ ███ ████ ██████████ ████████ ███ ██████████ █████████ ███ ████████ ████ █████ █████████ ████████ ████ ███ █████ ███████ ███ ████ ██ ███ ████████████ ██████ ██████ ██ ██████████ ██ ██████████ ███████ █████ ██████████ ██ ███ ████ █████████ ████ ████████ ██ █████ ██████ █████ ████ ███ ██████ ██████ ██████ ███ ██████████ ██ ████ ████ ███ ██████ █████ ████████ ██ ███ ███████ ███████ █████
Summarize Argument
The government should spend more on preventing chemical spills. Why? First, the current focus on cleanup isn’t keeping up with new spills. Second, prevention is more effective than cleanup. Finally, we learn that current annual spending on all spill prevention is less than annual spending on just one cleanup site. These premises lead to the conclusion that we should spend more on prevention than we are currently spending.
Identify Argument Part
The claim about how the government’s budget should be redirected is the main conclusion of the argument.
4.
The proposal about how the ████████████ ██████ ██████ ██ ██████████ █████ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ █████ ██ ███ █████████
a
It represents an ███████████ ████████████
The proposal of redirecting the budget is not unsupported—everything else in the argument supports it.
b
It both supports ███████ █████ ██ ███ ████████ ███ ██ █████████ ██ ███████
The proposal of redirecting the budget does receive support, but it doesn’t support anything in the argument. The proposal is the main conclusion.
c
It is the █████ ████ ███ ████████ ██ █ █████ ██ ██████████ ██ ████████
This correctly describes that the proposal of redirecting the budget is the author’s main conclusion, and is supported by everything else in the argument.
d
It is a ██████████████ ██ █████ ███ ████████ ██ ██████████ ██████
A presupposition is an assumption, which is an unstated premise. If something has been stated (like the proposal), then it cannot be an unstated premise.
e
It presents an █████████ ██ ███████ ████████ █████████ ██ ███ █████████
No other proposal is mentioned. The author is arguing for a change from the current policy, but there are no competing views.