Self-study
In discussing the pros and cons of monetary union among several European nations, some politicians have claimed that living standards in the countries concerned would first have to converge if monetary union is not to lead to economic chaos. ████ █████ ██ ███████ ██████ ██ ██ ████████████ ██ ███ ████ ████ ██████ █████████ ███████ ██████ ███████ ███████ ██████ █████████ ████ ████████████ ████ ██████ ██████████
Structure: Counter-Argument
The author is responding to someone else's argument. Some politicians claim that living standards among European countries need to converge before monetary union can be implemented — otherwise, monetary union will lead to economic chaos. The author rejects this claim based on the fact that there are countries that have stable economies, even though regions within those countries have very different living standards.
Analysis: Method of Reasoning
The author's response to the politicians' argument is based on an analogy. She assumes that the various European countries under the monetary union scheme are analogous to individual regions of countries that have stable overall economies. We could critique this argument and point out potential differences that might undermine the analogy. But for this Method of Reasoning question, we just need to notice that the author is using an argument by analogy to reject someone else's argument.
12.
In attempting to refute the ██████████████ ██████ ███ ██████ ████ █████ ███ ██ ███ ██████████
a
argues that those ██████ ███ █████ ███ ████████ █████ █ ████████ ████████████ ████ ███ ████ ████████
Incorrect. The politicians don't make any claims about a "temporal relationship" that they have observed, nor does the author claim that they are mistaken about such a relationship. The monetary union plan hasn't yet been implemented, so its consequences can't have been directly observed.
b
presents an earlier ████████ ██ ███ ██████ █████ ██████████ ██ █████ ███ █████████ █████████████ ███ ███ █████
Incorrect. The author doesn't provide an earlier example of the monetary union plan working. She points to a situation that she assumes is similar (different regions within the same country), but this isn't the same thing as an earlier case of a monetary union between multiple nations. (B) would be accurate if the author pointed out that ten years ago, some other countries with varying living standards formed a monetary union, but she doesn't do that.
c
argues that the ██████ ███████████ █████ █████ ██████████ ██ ████ ██████ ██ ██████ ███ ████████
Incorrect. The author never claims that the "feared consequence" — economic chaos — will inevitably occur. In fact, she is arguing that economic chaos does not necessarily have to occur.
d
gives an example ██ █ █████ ██ ████████ ███████ ██ ██ ██████████ ████████ ██ █████ ███ █████████ ████████████ ████████ ███████
Correct. (D) accurately describes the argument by analogy we discussed in our analysis. The author points to regions with different living standards within countries with stable economies as an analogy — i.e., a "state of affairs assumed to be relevantly similar" — suggesting that nations can have different living standards and still exist within a state of monetary union.
e
points out that ██ ██ ████████ ██████████████ ██ █████████ ███ █████ ███ ██ ███████ █████ ██ ██ ████ ███ █████ ██ ██ █████
Incorrect. The author never talks about an "implicit recommendation." Nor does she argue that any claim can neither be proven true nor false.