#10 - Commercial passenger airplanes can be equipped with a collision-avoidance radar system that

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Assumption—Cause and Effect. 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!

[Esquire123]

Why is E incorrect?

[Luke Haqq]

Hi Esquire123!

To address why answer choice (E) is incorrect, let's start with the conclusion and question type. The conclusion is contained in the second sentence: "passengers are safer on airplanes equipped with the system than on comparable airplanes not so equipped, even though the system frequently warns pilots to evade phantom airplanes." And we're dealing with an assumption, so something that is necessary in order for this conclusion to follow from the premises.

The Assumption Negation technique can help one determine whether an answer choice is an assumption required by the stimulus. That technique involves negating the answer choice and then plugging the result into the stimulus; if the argument falls apart, then that answer choice is a required assumption.

The correct answer choice, (C), states, "The frequency of invalid warnings will not cause pilots routinely to disregard the system's warnings." A rewording that negates this could be: "The frequency of invalid warnings [will] cause pilots routinely to disregard the system's warnings." If this were true, the argument would fall apart. The argument is that a given system on aircraft makes people on planes with the system safer. The negation of answer choice (C) is saying that pilots might routinely disregard the system. If that's the case, then it doesn't follow that people will be safer on planes with the system (because pilots are routinely not using it for its safety function of collision avoidance).

If we negate (E), by contrast, the argument doesn't fall apart. Answer choice (E) states, "The greatest safety risk for passengers traveling on commercial passenger airplanes is that of a midair collision." This could be reworded as, "The greatest safety risk for passengers traveling on commercial passenger airplanes is [not] that of a midair collision." This negation doesn't really get to the safety function of the system. Even if there were some other, even greater safety risk besides collision, it's still possible that passengers are safer on planes with the mentioned systems in one respect (collision avoidance) because of those systems.

[victoria1234]

why is (A) incorrect?

[Jeff Wren]

Hi victoria,

Answer A discusses whether passengers feel safer on planes with the anti-collision device rather than whether the passengers are in fact safer, which is the focus of the argument. We do not know one way or the other how passengers feel about the safety of the devices. They may or may not even be aware of their existence. And how people feel about a situation may not reflect the actual reality of that situation. For example, statistically, commercial flying is safer than driving, but doesn't feel that way to many people.

If you negate Answer A (passengers do feel safer), that does not hurt the argument. Perhaps they feel safer because they are in fact safer, much like I feel safer when I put my seat belt on.