Warning: foreach() argument must be of type array|object, bool given in /var/www/html/web/app/themes/studypress-core-theme/template-parts/header/mobile-offcanvas.php on line 20

Alice: Quotas on automobile imports to the United States should be eliminated. Then domestic producers would have to compete directly with Japanese manufacturers and would be forced to produce higher-quality cars. Such competition would be good for consumers. David: You fail to realize, Alice, that quotas on automobile imports are pervasive worldwide. Since Germany, Britain, and France have quotas, so should the United States. Which one of the following most accurately characterizes David's response to Alice's statement? (A) David falsely accuses Alice of contradicting herself. (B) David unfairly directs his argument against Alice personally. (C) David uncovers a hidden assumption underlying Alice's position. (D) David takes a position that is similar to the one Alice has taken. (E) David fails to address the reasons Alice cites in favor of her conclusion.

Short Answer

Expert verified
(E) David fails to address the reasons Alice cites in favor of her conclusion.

Step by step solution

01

Identifying Alice's Argument

Alice argues that eliminating quotas on automobile imports will create intense competition, forcing domestic producers to improve quality, benefiting consumers.
02

Understanding David's Response

David responds by pointing out that quotas are common in other countries like Germany, Britain, and France. He argues that the US should also maintain quotas because other countries do.
03

Analyzing David's Strategy

David's response does not directly address Alice's points about consumer benefits and competition. Instead, he justifies maintaining quotas by stating that other countries have them.
04

Evaluating Response Characteristics

David's argument is based on the fact that other countries have similar policies, but he does not refute or consider Alice's reasons for advocating the elimination of quotas.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with Vaia!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Understanding Argument Analysis
When engaging in argument analysis, the primary goal is to dissect and evaluate the components of an argument. In the given exercise, Alice presents a clear argument: eliminating quotas on automobile imports will lead to increased competition among car manufacturers, benefiting consumers with higher-quality cars. David, on the other hand, argues that quotas should stay because other countries use them.
To analyze these arguments effectively, identify the premises and the conclusion each person presents.
  • Alice's Premise: Removing quotas will force domestic producers to compete with international manufacturers.
  • Alice's Conclusion: Such competition will improve car quality, benefiting consumers.
  • David's Premise: Quotas are common in other nations, like Germany and France.
  • David's Conclusion: The US should also maintain these quotas.
An important aspect of argument analysis is evaluating whether the premises support the conclusion logically and sufficiently. David's response does not necessarily counter Alice's logic directly; instead, it focuses on what other countries are doing.
Approaching Logical Reasoning Questions
Logical reasoning questions often assess the ability to understand and evaluate arguments. These questions are fundamental in tests like the LSAT, helping to determine one's aptitude for analyzing relationships and contradictions.
In the exercise, the question centers around which option best describes David's response to Alice's argument. To tackle such questions:
1. **Identify the Claim**: What is each person asserting? For Alice, it's the benefit to consumers without quotas. For David, it's the international norm of maintaining quotas. 2. **Evaluate the Logic**: Does David address Alice’s points directly? His argument does not tackle Alice's consumer benefit reasoning. 3. **Select the Best Description**: Here, option (E) is accurate because David does not address Alice’s specific reasons regarding consumer benefits and competition.
Logical reasoning questions require distinguishing between responding to arguments directly and merely providing an alternate perspective. By understanding the questions, students can better navigate similar challenges.
Competition in Economics Context
In economics, competition involves multiple producers competing to attract consumers. It is often seen as beneficial as it can lead to improved products and services. In the context of Alice's argument, removing quotas on automobile imports could intensify competition, pushing domestic manufacturers to enhance product quality.
  • **Consumer Benefits**: Intense competition often leads to better products at lower prices, aligning with Alice's assertion.
  • **Producer Perspectives**: While consumers benefit from better products, producers may face higher pressure to innovate and reduce costs.
David's response overlooks these consumer and producer dynamics, focusing instead on maintaining the status quo because of international practices.
The exercise highlights how understanding economic competition can deepen one's analysis of policy changes like quota eliminations. By examining different stakeholder perspectives, we gain insights into how consumer interests might differ from those of producers or policymakers.
Insights into International Trade Policy
International trade policy involves regulations and practices that countries adopt to manage trade with other nations. Quotas, tariffs, and restrictions are common tools used to protect domestic industries or respond to international competition.
David’s argument rests on the prevalence of quotas in countries like Germany and France, using this as justification for the United States to follow suit. This reflects a typical protectionist stance, where countries try to shield their domestic industries by replicating others' trade policies.
Understanding international trade policy requires consideration of:
  • **Protectionism vs. Free Trade**: Protectionism involves using quotas and tariffs to protect domestic industries, which can limit competition. Free trade advocates argue that fewer restrictions lead to more competition and innovation.
  • **Global Comparisons**: Countries often look at international practices to inform their trade policies. However, this doesn't always address domestic concerns like consumer benefits or competitive pressures.
By comparing countries’ trade policies, one obtains a clear picture of how they impact both local industries and global trade relationships. For students, understanding these dynamics is essential to grasp the broader implications of policy decisions in real-world contexts.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

Giselle: The government needs to ensure that the public consumes less petroleum. When things cost more, people buy and use less of them. Therefore, the government should raise the sales tax on gasoline, a major petroleum product. Antoine: The government should not raise the sales tax on gasoline. Such an increase would be unfair to gasoline users. If taxes are to be increased, the increases should be applied in such a way that they spread the burden of providing the government with increased revenues among many people, not just the users of gasoline. As a rebuttal of Giselle's argument, Antoine's response is ineffective because (A) he ignores the fact that Giselle does not base her argument for raising the gasoline sales tax on the government's need for increased revenues (B) he fails to specify how many taxpayers there are who are not gasoline users (C) his conclusion is based on an assertion regarding unfairness, and unfaimess is a very subjective concept (D) he mistakenly assumes that Giselle wants a sales tax increase only on gasoline (E) he makes the implausible assumption that the burden of increasing government revenues can be more evenly distributed among the people through other means besides increasing the gasoline sales tax

If retail stores experience a decrease in revenues during this holiday season, then either attitudes toward extravagant gift-giving have changed or prices have risen beyond the level most people can afford. If attitudes have changed, then we all have something to celebrate this season. If prices have risen beyond the level most people can afford. then it must be that salaries have not kept pace with rising prices during the past year. Assume the premises above to be true. If salaries have kept pace with rising prices during the past year, which one of the following must be true? (A) Attitudes toward extravagant gift-giving have changed. (B) Retail stores will not experience a decrease in retail sales during this holiday season. (C) Prices in retail stores have not risen beyond the level that most people can afford during this holiday season. (D) Attitudes toward extravagant gift-giving have not changed, and stores will not experience a decrease in revenues during this holiday season. (E) Either attitudes toward extravagant gift-giving have changed or prices have risen beyond the level that most people can afford during this holiday season.

Every week, the programming office at an FM radio station reviewed unsolicited letters from listeners who were expressing comments on the station's programs. One week, the station received 50 letters with favorable comments about the station's news reporting and music selection and 10 letters with unfavorable comments on the station's new movie review segment of the evening program. Faced with this information, the programming director assumed that if some listeners did not like the movie review segment, then there must be other listeners who did like it. Therefore, he decided to continue the movie review segment of the evening program. Which one of the following identifies a problem with the programming director's decision process? (A) He failed to recognize that people are more likely to write letters of criticism than of praise. (B) He could not properly infer from the fact that some listeners did not like the movie review segment that some others did. (C) He failed to take into consideration the discrepancy in numbers between favorable and unfavorable letters received. (D) He failed to take into account the relation existing between the movie review segment and the news. (E) He did not wait until he received at least 50 letters with unfavorable comments about the movie review segment before making his decision.

There is little point in looking to artists for insights into political issues. Most of them hold political views that are less insightful than those of any reasonably welleducated person who is not an artist. Indeed, when taken as a whole, the statements made by artists, including those considered to be great, indicate that artistic talent and political insight are rarely found together. Which one of the following can be inferred from the passage? (A) There are no artists who have insights into political issues. (B) A thorough education in art makes a person reasonably well educated. (C) Every reasonably well-educated person who is not an artist has more insight into political isswes than any artist. (D) Politicians rarely have any artistic talent. (E) Some artists are no less politically insightful than some reasonably well- educated persons who are not artists.

An advertisement states: Like Danaxil, all headache pills can stop your headache. But when you are in pain, you want relief right away. Danaxil is for you - no headache pill stops pain mote quickly. Evelyn and Jane are each suffering from a headache. Suppose Evelyn takes Danaxil and Jane takes its leading competitor. Which one of the following can be properly concluded from the claims in the advertisement? (A) Evelyn's headache pain will be relieved, but Jane's will not. (B) Evelyn's headache pain will be relieved more quickly than Jane's. (C) Evelyn's headache will be relieved at least as quickly as Jane's. (D) Jane's headache pain will be relieved at the same time as is Evelyn's. (E) Jane will be taking Danaxil for relief from headache pain.

See all solutions

Recommended explanations on English Textbooks

View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.

Sign-up for free