Self-study
Conclusion Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the environment. ████ ██ ███████ ███ ████ ██████ █ ███ ██ ███████ ███ ████ ████ ██ ██████ ██ ███ ████ ███████ ███████ ████ ███ ███ ███ ███████ ███ ████ ██ █████████ ████ █████ █████████
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that reducing speed limits would not help the environment or save lives because when cars are driven more slowly, they are on the road for longer. The author posits that more time on the road allows vehicles more time to emit exhaust fumes and increases the time during which cars are at risk of an accident.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author’s conclusion is unsupported because he ignores two major points: that exhaust fumes could be emitted at a higher rate when the car is driving faster, and that cars could be at a greater risk of getting into accidents when they are driving faster. The amount of time on the road is not necessarily the cause of higher exhaust fume emissions and accidents; without addressing alternate factors like speeding that affect the amount of exhaust fumes and accidents, this conclusion does not follow.
14.
The argument's reasoning is flawed ███████ ███ ████████
a
neglects the fact ████ ████ █████████ ██████████ ██████ █████ ██████
This point is not relevant to the author’s argument because the author is not concerned about what happens when people are speeding; instead, he discusses what happens when people spend more time on the road as a result of not speeding.
b
ignores the possibility ██ ████████ ████ ████████ █████ ██████ █████ ████ █████████████ ███ ██████ ████████
The author’s conclusion focuses only on environmental- and safety-related benefits. Even if there were other benefits, they would be irrelevant to this argument, because the author is precise in defining what his argument applies to: safety and environmental benefits only.
c
fails to consider ████ ██ █████ ██████ ███ ████████ █████████ ███████ █████ ████ ████████ ███ ██████ ██ ████ ██ ███ ████ ██ ███ █████ ████
This doesn’t address the main focus of the argument. The author emphasizes the amount of time cars are on the road, rather than the total number of cars on the road. This also might strengthen the argument—if more cars are on the road at one time, emissions and the chance of an accident would be higher.
d
presumes, without providing ██████████████ ████ █████ █████████ ███ █ █████ ██████████ ████ ███ ██████████ █████████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ████ ███ ████ █████
The author mistakenly assumes that driving faster would not increase the rate at which cars emit fumes. If cars emitted more fumes while driving fast than while driving slow, then reducing speed limits could indeed reduce the amount of emissions created and help the environment.
e
presumes, without providing ██████████████ ████ ███████ ███ █ ███████████ ████ ██ █████████ ████ ██ ████ █████ █ ███ ██ ████ ██ ███ ████
The author never defines a significant vs. an insignificant risk of collision. Additionally, he never states that the only way to risk collision is to spend more time on the road; instead, he states that spending more time on the road increases your risk of collision.