Subscription pricing
Astronomer: Astronomical observatories in many areas have become useless because light from nearby cities obscures the stars. ████ ██████ █████ ████ █████ ████████████ ███ ██████ ███ ███████ ████ ████████████ ████ ██████ ██ ███████████ ████ ██ ███████████ ████████ ███ █████ █████████████ ████ ███████ ██████████ ██████ █████ ███ ████ ███ ██████████ ███████████ ████████ ███ █████████ ███████ ██████ █████ ████ ██████ ███ █████ █████ █████████ ██ ██ █████████ ████████ ██ ████ ████ ████████████ ███████ ███ ██████████ ████ ██████
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The astronomer considers an argument held by many people and concludes that it is possible to have both well-lighted streets and relatively dark skies. As evidence, the astronomer points out that in Sandsville the local observatory’s view is clear because the city has both restricted unnecessary lighting and installed street lamps that direct all light downward.
Describe Method of Reasoning
The astronomer counters a position held by others. She does this by offering a counterexample. It is not true that interference from lights is inevitable because in Sandsville relatively dark skies are achieved by restricting unnecessary lighting and installing special street lamps.
11.
The astronomer's argument proceeds by
a
appealing to a ██████████ █████████ ██ █████████ █ ██████ ████ ██████
b
questioning the accuracy ██ ████████ █████ ██ ███████ ██ ███ ████████ ████████
c
proposing an alternative ██████████ ███████████ ███ █ ███████ ██████████
d
making a distinction ███████ █████
e
offering a counterexample ██ █ ███████ █████