#26 - Letter to the editor: In calling on antinuclear activists to

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Strengthen, Principle. The correct answer choice is (C).

Answer choice (A):

Answer choice (B):

Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice.

Answer choice (D):

Answer choice (E):

This explanation is still in progress. Please post any questions below!

[nicizle]

I picked B for this question, as I felt that the stimulus described a situation in which elimination of nuclear power was the ideal, but alternative disposal methods of nuclear waste would not solve what anti-nuclear activists deem as the core issue (the use of nuclear energy at all), making it more 'acceptable' to the masses over time.

What exactly makes B incorrect, as opposed to C? I also thought A was an attractive answer choice because while alternative disposal methods of nuclear waste may be better, it still wouldn't solve the core issue, and it would desensitize people to the issue (as noted in the stimulus).

I'm really trying to correct how I'm approaching this question types, so I'd appreciate an explanation of what makes the wrong answers wrong, and what ultimately tipped the scales in favor of the right answer.

[Dana D]

Hey Nicizle,

We want to look at the conclusion of this argument and then examine the premises the author uses to justify that conclusion. The conclusion is that pro-nuclear power people are dishonest because they are calling for anti-nuclear power people to find better ways to dispose of nuclear waste. Why does the author say this? Because anti-nuclear power groups don't want any nuclear power anymore, and finding better ways to dispose of the waste would likely make nuclear power more widely acceptable.

Analyzing the author's argument here, it seems like there is a jump in logic. Why does wanting better waste methods make the pro-nuclear power people dishonest? The author says that better waste methods would make nuclear power more acceptable and likely to continue, but what about a pro nuclear power person saying this is dishonest?

To address this jump in logic, we need to add new information to the argument. In principle questions like this, we are looking for an answer choice that would make the conclusion logically follow. Answer choice (C) does this, because if we add the information in answer choice (C) to the stimulus, we would see that pro-nuclear power people are dishonest because they are asking the antinuclear power people to act in a way that undermines their goals, because finding better waste methods would actually increase the acceptability of nuclear power, which is the opposite of what the antinuclear power groups want.

Answer choice (B) is a tempting option, however, it includes the caveat "if improving it [the harmful practice] will not significantly reduce its capacity to cause harm." If we added answer choice (B) into the stimulus, would we be able to fully justify the conclusion? Not necessarily, because improving the waste methods for nuclear power might significantly reduce the harm of nuclear power, which would mean answer choice (B) is irrelevant. Additionally, answer choice (B) doesn't justify the author calling pronuclear people dishonest - perhaps it is better to eliminate a harmful practice, but it makes sense that pronuclear people want to perpetuate nuclear power so this is not dishonest. Answer choice (A) is similarly missing this connection to why pronuclear people are dishonest.

I hope that explanation helps for this question. In regards to overall strategy, if you are deciding between two answer choices, try and approach each one as if you are looking for a reason to eliminate them, rather than a reason to pick them. In this case, answer choice (B) looked good, but if you were trying to argue against it and eliminate it you would see that there is a loophole in the argument (because nuclear power's harm might be reduced due to better waste processes).

Additionally, always keep the conclusion in mind. The author's conclusion here is that pronuclear people are dishonest. So, if we are looking for a principle that would justify the author's conclusion, we likely need an answer choice that explains why the pronuclear people are acting dishonestly in this situation, since none of the premises in the stimulus do so.

Hope that helps!