Self-study
It is repeatedly claimed that the dumping of nuclear waste poses no threat to people living nearby. ██ ████ █████ █████ ██ ████ ████ ██████████ █████ █████ ██ ██ ██████ ███ ███ ████████ █████ ██ █████ ██ █████ ███████████ ███ ███ ██████ ██ ███████ ███████ █████ ████ ██ ███ ████ ████████ █████████ ███████ ██████████ ██ ███ ████ ██████ ████ █████████ █████ ██████ ██ ███ ████ ██ █████ ███████████ ███ ███████
Argument Summary
The argument concludes that policy-makers have some concerns about the safety of dumping nuclear waste for people living nearby, even though they repeatedly state that nuclear waste poses no risk. Why? Because if they really believed there was no risk, they would be comfortable dumping nuclear waste in densely-populated areas. But in fact, the policy is to dump nuclear waste only in sparsely-populated areas.
Objective: Weaken
To come to its conclusion, the argument has to assume there isn't another reason for dumping nuclear waste only in sparsely-populated areas; that safety is the policy-makers' only motivation. So to weaken the argument, we can show an alternative reason why policy-makers may avoid dumping nuclear waste in densely-populated areas. For example, maybe the political cost of doing so is just too high, even though there's truly no safety risk.
16.
Which one of the following, ██ █████ █████ ████ █████████ ██████ ███ █████████
a
Evacuation plans in ███ █████ ██ ██ ████████ █████ ███ ██ ██████████ ██ ████ █████████ ██████ █████ ███ ██████████ ██ ██████
A concern about evacuation after an accident is ultimately a safety concern. By raising a specific safety concern, (A) is consistent with the argument, rather than weakening it.
b
In the event ██ ██ █████████ ██ ██ ███████ ████ █████ ██████ █████ ██ ██████ ██ █ ████████ █████████ ████ ██ █ ███████ █████████ █████
A concern about who would be harmed by an accident is ultimately a safety concern. By raising a specific safety concern, (B) is consistent with the argument, rather than weakening it.
c
Dumping of nuclear █████ █████ █████ ████████ ███ ████████████ ████████ ██ ████████ █████████ ████ ██ ███████ █████████ ██████
(C) gives us an alternative reason why policy-makers might prefer to dump nuclear waste in sparsely-populated areas: it's cheaper and easier. By explaining why policy-makers act the way they do even in the absence of safety concerns, (C) undermines the assumption that safety concerns are the only reason not to dump waste in densely-populated areas.
d
There are dangers ██████████ ████ ████████ ██████ ███ ███ ████ ██ ██████ ████ ████ █████ ██ █████ ███████████
Analogizing nuclear waste to another kind of waste that is known to be dangerous is fully consistent with the argument. (D) doesn't weaken the claim that policy-makers are concerned about the safety of nuclear waste.
e
Until there is ██ █████ ██ █████ ████ ███████ █████ ███ █████ ██ █████ █████ ██ ███████ ████ █████ ████ ████ ███ █████ ██████ ██ ███ ███████
Any doubt that nuclear dumps are safe is ultimately a safety concern. By stating a principle based on a safety concern, (E) is consistent with the argument, rather than weakening it.