PT132.S2.Q5

PrepTest 132 - Section 2 - Question 5

Hide analysis

Area resident: Support Childhood lead poisoning has declined steadily since the 1970s, when leaded gasoline was phased out and lead paint was banned. ███ ██████ ██████████ ████████ ████ ██ ███████ ██ ████ ██████ █████ █████ ███████ ████ █████ ████ █████ ███████████ ██████ ████████ ██████████ ██ ██ █████████ ███ ████ █████ ██ █████ ██████ █████████ ████ █████████ ██ ███ ████ ████ ███████ ██ ███████████

Summarize Argument

The resident concludes that if all remaining lead paint is eliminated from homes in the area, child lead poisoning will be eradicated. This is based on the observation that childhood lead poisoning has declined since gasoline and paint stopped being made with lead. However, there is still lead paint in some homes.

Identify and Describe Flaw

The resident claims that the elimination of lead paint from homes will completely eradicate childhood lead poisoning in the area. This overlooks the possibility that other sources of lead could be present. Those sources could continue to contribute to lead poisoning, even if lead paint in houses is eliminated.

Show answer
5.

The area resident's argument is ██████ ██ ████ ██

a

relies on statistical ██████ ████ ███ ██████ ██ ██ ██████████

There’s no reason to believe that the statistical claims used in the argument are unreliable.

0%
b

relies on an ██████████ ████ ██ ██████████ ██ ████████ ████ ███ ██████████ ██ ████

There isn’t any assumption in the argument that assumes the conclusion is true.

3%
c

fails to consider ████ █████ ███ ██ █████ ███████████ ███████ ██ ████ ██ ███ ██████ ███████████

The resident overlooks the possibility that other major lead sources could still cause childhood lead poisoning in the area. However, if that were true, it would severely undermine the resident’s conclusion.

88%
d

takes for granted ████ ████ █████ ██ █████ ███ ██ ██████████ ████████████

The argument doesn’t make any claims about whether lead paint in homes can be eliminated economically. The argument only makes claims about what would happen if it were eliminated.

0%
e

takes for granted ████ ████████ ██████ ██ ███ ██ ███ █████ ██ ███ ████ ████ ███████ ████ █████

The argument doesn’t take for granted that children reside in all of the homes with lead paint, only that there are at least some children residing in homes with lead paint.

9%

Confirm action

Are you sure?