#16 - Motorcoach driver: Professional drivers spend much

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Point at Issue. The correct answer choice is (C)

Regarding the statements in answer choices (A), (B), (D), and (E), the police officer's opinion is unknown. Thus, all four of those answer choices are incorrect. It is also the case that the motorcoach driver's opinion regarding the statement in answer choice (E) is unknown.

[srcline@noctrl.edu]

Hello

Can someone please explain why answer choice A is not correct?

The Motorcoach's conclusion is that the speed limit on high ways should not be reduced because its going to force some people who are law abiding and competent drivers to break the law.

Police officer responds with a conditional by saying that it is no true to say that reducing the speed limit would be the cause of such illegal behavior.

The motorcoach driver directly says that the speed limit on major highways should not be reduced b/c ext.....

And the police officer responds by saying so it is not true to say reducing the speed limit would be the cause of such illegal behavior.

If someone can explain the difference between A and C , that would help a great deal
Thankyou
Sarah

[Clay Cooper]

Hi again Sarah,

Another good question.

This is a point at issue question, so we need to use the Agree/Disagree test from lesson 10 (if you are taking the full-length course; if not, no sweat, I'll explain).

In short, the question asks us what the two speakers disagree about. We need, therefore, to pick an answer choice that names a specific issue on which they have both actually voiced their own opinion, and those opinions need to contradict each other. It is important that we don't put words in their mouths, so to speak (....lol); an answer choice can only be correct if we can prove by referring to the stimulus that each speaker has addressed that particular issue and that their viewpoints disagree. In other words, we need to pick an answer choice that makes a statement to which one of the speakers would say 'Yes, I agree,' and the other would say, 'No, I disagree,' - we need to apply the Agree/Disagree test.

Answer choice A is incorrect because it doesn't raise such an issue. We do know that the motorcoach driver has addressed the desirability of reducing the speed limit on major highways; he is against it, and would respond to the statement in A by saying, 'No, I disagree.' However, what does the policeman think of the statement in A? Does he want us to reduce the speed limit? He hasn't said, so we don't know - and thus A is incorrect. Maybe he is against it as well; maybe he doesn't want to have to write more tickets, or for traffic to be slowed down even more than it currently is.

Answer choice C, on the other hand, names a specific issue on which they both have spoken and on which they do disagree. The driver would read C and say, 'Yes, I agree' that reducing the speed limit will cause these professional drivers, for whom he is advocating, to break the law, despite being safe and competent. The policeman, however, has pointed out to the driver that the professionals have a choice like everyone else to drive within the speed limit or not, no matter what it is or whether it has changed; thus, he has said, it is incorrect to say changing the limit would actually cause any driver to break it. Hence, he would respond to the statement in C by saying, 'No, I disagree' and thus C passes the Agree/Disagree test and is our answer.

Does that clarify it?

[srcline@noctrl.edu]

Hello Clay,

Okay this makes a lot more sense using the agree and disagree test,I think with the time constraints I forgot about this method. I understand why C is correct now, because it would directly undermine MD's argument that "speed limit major highways should not be reduced" b/c both law abiding and competent drivers would lead them to break the law. Also the cop never advocates for the speed limit to be reduced right? would that be another reason why A is incorrect?



Also thank you for your previous replies, they helped a great deal.

Sarah

[Adam Tyson]

Clay's response was right on the money, and I think you get it, but I want to clarify something in response to your last post. The issue is not whether an answer would undermine or support one or the other party's argument, but only about whether or not they would agree with the statement. So, your analysis of the Police Officer's response is spot on - he never voiced an opinion about what is desirable, so we have to reject answer A. However, we like C not because it supports one person's argument and weakens the argument of the other, but rather because one person agrees with it and the other disagrees with it. It's a bit nitpicky of me, perhaps, but since we aren't told to accept the answer choices as true statements, we don't want to treat them as such. Don't think of it as a weaken vs strengthen situation, but as an agreement/disagreement situation. Probably all comes out the same way in the end, but I think you'll find it easier to use that agree/disagree test on these (relatively rare) questions.

Good work - keep it up!

[Oakenshield]

But what's the difference between B and C? I don't know why B is incorrect.

[Adam Tyson]

Hey Thorin (may I call you Thorin?), thanks for the question. See above for a good discussion of the Agree/Disagree approach to analyzing these Point at Issue questions. Applying that to answer B here, what would the driver say? It seems pretty clear that he would say "I disagree" - he implies pretty strongly that at least some pros will end up speeding if the speed limit is reduced. Now, what would the police officer say about B? We know he says that everyone CAN drive the speed limit. What does he say, or imply, about whether they will or not? Not a thing - we have no way of knowing what he thinks about what WILL happen, just what CAN happen. He may be just as likely to say "I disagree" in the belief that at least some people will speed.

That's why we cannot pick answer B, because they are not arguing about what will happen, only about whether reducing the speed limit will cause some folks to speed. The driver says that WILL cause some to speed, the officer says it will NOT cause them to speed. They might still speed, but the officer would say the reduction in the speed limit is not the cause of that speeding.

Hope that cleared it up for you!

[Oakenshield]

Hey Thorin (may I call you Thorin?), thanks for the question. See above for a good discussion of the Agree/Disagree approach to analyzing these Point at Issue questions. Applying that to answer B here, what would the driver say? It seems pretty clear that he would say "I disagree" - he implies pretty strongly that at least some pros will end up speeding if the speed limit is reduced. Now, what would the police officer say about B? We know he says that everyone CAN drive the speed limit. What does he say, or imply, about whether they will or not? Not a thing - we have no way of knowing what he thinks about what WILL happen, just what CAN happen. He may be just as likely to say "I disagree" in the belief that at least some people will speed.

That's why we cannot pick answer B, because they are not arguing about what will happen, only about whether reducing the speed limit will cause some folks to speed. The driver says that WILL cause some to speed, the officer says it will NOT cause them to speed. They might still speed, but the officer would say the reduction in the speed limit is not the cause of that speeding.

Hope that cleared it up for you!

Thanks for your help! ---- By Thorin