Self-study
Structure: Counter-Argument
Eva argues that a "smart highway" system should be installed that would tell drivers about traffic congestion and alternative routes by means of in-vehicle computers or programmable highway signs. She says that this system would improve traffic flow, and thus not only improve the tempers of drivers, but also reduce the loss of money and productivity that comes from traffic congestion.
Luis responds to Eva's argument by suggesting that a "smart highway" system wouldn't necessarily lead to better results than the traffic reports that are already on the radio.
Analysis: Necessary Assumptions
Eva's premise only states that a smart highway system would inform drivers about congestion and alternative routes. Her conclusion about the benefits that would result from such a system assumes that simply informing drivers about these things would actually lead drivers to start using the alternative routes. What Luis is trying to point out is that maybe information isn't the problem: maybe drivers already know about alternative routes through the radio traffic reports, but aren't using them because they're too out of the way, etc. So an assumption Eva's argument depends on is that smart highways sharing information about congestion would actually improve congestion.
9.
If Eva responded to Luis ██ ██████ ████ ███ ███████ ██████████ █████ ███████ ███ ███ █████ ██ ████ █ ██████████ ███████████ ██ ███████ ████████ ██ ███████ ███████████ █████ ███ ██ ███ ██████████ ██ █████ █████ ████ ██████████ ████████ ██████████
a
Bad weather, which █████ ████████ ███████ █████ █████ ███████ ██ ████ ████ ███████ ██ ███ █ ████████ ██████████ ██████ ███ ██ ██████████
This wouldn't strengthen. This just tells us that bad weather would be a factor slowing down traffic regardless of whether "smart highways" were in place. That doesn't help us decide whether or not the "smart highway" system will provide benefits that the radio alert system does not. It could still be possible that, by informing drivers about alternate routes in bad weather with a degree of detail that one-minute radio reports don't provide, "smart highways" would help drivers deal with bad weather better than radio reports do. Since (A) doesn't give us a reason to side with Luis rather than Eva, it doesn't strengthen Luis's challenge.
b
It would be ████ ██████ ██ ████ █████ ████████ ████ ████ ██████████ █████████ ███████ ███████ ████ ██ ███████ █ ████████ ██████████ ███████
Correct. Remember that Eva argues that "smart highways" will provide various benefits, including saving money. Luis argues that there's no reason to think "smart highways" will provide any more benefits than radio traffic alerts already do; we're told to imagine Eva responding that radio traffic alerts are too short to adequately describe congestion patterns, and therefore that smart highways would still provide additional benefits.
(B), if true, would undermine Eva's objection — we could increase the length of traffic alerts and make them continual, and this would still be cheaper than installing the "smart highway" system — and strengthen Luis's case that there's no reason to expect "smart highways" to provide more benefits than the radio alert system.
c
Radio reports can ████ ████ ██ ██████████ ████ ██ ███████ ███ █ ████████ ██████████ ██████ █████ ██████████ ███ █████████ ██ ██ ████ ██████████
Incorrect. This is a point in favor of "smart highways" and against radio traffic alerts, which is the opposite of what Luis is arguing.
d
The proposed traffic ██████████ █████ ███ ██████ ███ ███████ ██ ████████
Irrelevant. Neither Luis nor Eva is making an argument based on drivers' privacy.
e
Toll collection booths, █████ ██████████ ███████ ████████████ █████ ███████ ██ ████████ ██ ███ ████████ ██████████ ██████ ██ ██████████ ████████ ██ ████████████ ████████ █████ ███████ █████████ ██ ████ ██████
Like (C), this is a point potentially in favor of "smart highways," showing that they could provide benefits that the current radio traffic alert system does not. This doesn't strengthen Luis's case.