Evaluating Argument Strength Flashcards

Question: Should organ donation be opt-out rather than opt-in? Argument: Yes, because countries with opt-out systems have significantly higher donor rates, saving more lives. This argument is:

Answer: Strong, because it provides comparative empirical evidence directly supporting the policy's stated goal

The argument is strong because it uses comparative empirical evidence from real countries to show the policy achieves its primary objective of increasing life-saving donations.

Question: Should the death penalty be abolished? Argument: No, because it serves as a deterrent to violent crime. This argument is:

Answer: Weak, because research has consistently failed to show that the death penalty deters crime more than long imprisonment

The argument is weak because decades of criminological research have not established that capital punishment deters crime more effectively than alternatives like life imprisonment.

Question: Should large corporations pay a higher tax rate than small businesses? Argument: Yes, because large corporations earn significantly more profit and can absorb higher taxes without threatening operations. This argument is:

Answer: Strong, because it identifies a proportional capacity to pay, which is a standard principle of progressive taxation

The argument is strong because it applies the widely accepted principle that entities with greater financial capacity can bear a proportionally greater tax burden without undue harm.

Question: Should remote work be made a legal right for office workers? Argument: Yes, because employees are happier working from home. This argument is:

Answer: Weak, because happiness is subjective and varies by individual, making it a poor basis for a universal legal mandate

The argument is weak because subjective happiness varies widely and does not by itself justify a universal legal mandate that overrides all employer and job-type considerations.

Question: Should fast food companies be required to display calorie counts on menus? Argument: No, because consumers already know fast food is unhealthy and the information will not change behavior. This argument is:

Answer: Weak, because studies show calorie labeling does influence consumer choices for at least some customers

The argument is weak because research shows calorie labeling does influence purchasing decisions for a meaningful subset of consumers, contradicting the premise that it changes no behavior.

Question: Should the minimum wage be raised to $20 per hour nationally? Argument: Yes, because workers at current minimum wage levels often cannot afford basic necessities in major cities. This argument is:

Answer: Strong, because it presents evidence of genuine financial hardship directly motivating the policy

The argument is strong because documented inability to afford basic necessities is a clear, relevant harm that a wage increase directly addresses.

Question: Should standardized testing be eliminated from college admissions? Argument: No, because standardized tests provide an objective measure that levels the playing field for students from diverse backgrounds. This argument is:

Answer: Weak, because research shows test scores correlate strongly with family income, undermining the 'level playing field' claim

The argument is weak because its core premise — that standardized tests level the playing field — is contradicted by data showing strong correlation between scores and socioeconomic status.