Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the environment. This is because the more slowly a car is driven, the more time it spends on the road spewing exhaust into the air and running the risk of colliding with other vehicles. The argument's reasoning is flawed because the argument Options: A . &nbspIgnore the possibility of benefits from lowering speed limits other than environmental and safety benefits B . &nbspFails to consider that if speed limits are reduced, increased driving times will increase the number of cars on the road at any given time C . &nbspPresumes, without providing justification, that total emissions for a given automobile trip are determined primarily by the amount of time the trip takes D . &nbspPresumes, without providing justification, that drivers run a significant risk of collision only if they spend a lot of time on the road

Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the environment. This is

Question

Reducing speed limits neither saves lives nor protects the environment. This is because the more slowly a car is driven, the more time it spends on the road spewing exhaust into the air and running the risk of colliding with other vehicles.
The argument's reasoning is flawed because the argument

Options:

A . Ignore the possibility of benefits from lowering speed limits other than environmental and safety benefits

B . Fails to consider that if speed limits are reduced, increased driving times will increase the number of cars on the road at any given time

C . Presumes, without providing justification, that total emissions for a given automobile trip are determined primarily by the amount of time the trip takes

D . Presumes, without providing justification, that drivers run a significant risk of collision only if they spend a lot of time on the road

Answer: Option C
:
C
The answer is a close call between (c) and (d). We need to find the flaw in the reasoning. The argument states that "more slowly a car is driven, the more time it spends on the road spewing exhaust into the air and running the risk of colliding with other vehicles” There are more number of assumptions required to line
" total emissions for a given automobile trip to the amount of time the trip takes”than linking " risk of collision with the time spent on the road”
Therefore option (c ) is a bigger flaw compared to Option (d)
So (c) is the right answer.

Was this answer helpful ?

Next Question