Evaluating Argument Strength Flashcards

Question: Should public transit be free for all riders? Argument: Yes, because free transit would reduce car usage and lower urban air pollution. This argument is:

Answer: Strong, because it presents a direct, evidence-consistent causal chain from the policy to an environmental benefit

The argument is strong because research supports that cost is a barrier to transit use, and reduced car usage does lower urban pollution, creating a plausible and evidence-grounded causal chain.

Question: Should pharmaceutical companies be required to publish the research data behind their drug trials? Argument: Yes, because independent scientists could verify results and catch errors before drugs reach patients. This argument is:

Answer: Strong, because independent verification is a foundational principle of scientific integrity and patient safety

The argument is strong because independent replication and verification are core scientific safeguards, and the argument directly connects transparency to patient safety.

Question: Should college athletes be paid salaries by their universities? Argument: No, because college is an academic institution, not a professional sports league. This argument is:

Answer: Weak, because major college athletic programs generate hundreds of millions in revenue, making purely academic framing outdated

The argument is weak because the premise that colleges are purely academic ignores the commercial reality of major athletic programs, which operate as substantial revenue-generating enterprises.

Question: Should governments impose taxes on sugary beverages? Argument: Yes, because similar taxes on tobacco have successfully reduced smoking rates. This argument is:

Answer: Strong, because it draws on a directly analogous, empirically successful policy precedent

The argument is strong because it cites a closely analogous policy (tobacco tax) with documented success in changing consumption behavior, providing relevant empirical support for the proposal.

Question: Should all police officers be required to wear body cameras? Argument: No, because body cameras invade the privacy of crime victims who are recorded without consent. This argument is:

Answer: Strong, because victim privacy is a legitimate concern that the policy must address

The argument is strong in that victim privacy is a genuine, legitimate concern — it correctly identifies a real drawback that policy designers must address, even if it may not ultimately defeat the policy.

Question: Should the US implement a universal basic income (UBI)? Argument: Yes, because automation is eliminating millions of jobs and workers need income support. This argument is:

Answer: Strong, because it identifies a documented technological trend with direct implications for worker income security

The argument is strong because automation's displacement of workers is a documented, ongoing trend, and the argument directly connects this trend to the need for income support.

Question: Should cities require new residential buildings to include affordable housing units? Argument: No, because developers will simply build fewer units overall if forced to include low-margin affordable units, worsening the housing shortage. This argument is:

Answer: Strong, because it identifies a plausible market mechanism by which the policy could produce the opposite of its intended effect

The argument is strong because it identifies a coherent economic mechanism — reduced developer incentive — that could plausibly cause the policy to backfire, which is a substantive and relevant objection.