Soal SMA · Latihan campuran · Kesulitan 4/5
Read the following argument: 'Cities that invest in extensive public transportation networks consistently report lower per-capita carbon emissions than cities of similar size that rely mainly on private vehicles. Therefore, expanding public transportation is the most effective way to reduce a city's carbon footprint.' Which of the following is the strongest critical evaluation of this argument?
- A.The argument assumes that the observed correlation between public transportation and lower emissions necessarily proves causation, while other factors such as industrial structure or climate policy could explain the difference.
- B.The argument is invalid because carbon emissions are not a reliable indicator of environmental quality in urban areas.
- C.The argument fails because some cities with private vehicles may still have lower emissions than cities with public transportation.
- D.The argument is too narrow because it ignores the role of individual recycling habits in reducing emissions.
Kunci jawaban & pembahasan
Jawaban: The argument assumes that the observed correlation between public transportation and lower emissions necessarily proves causation, while other factors such as industrial structure or climate policy could explain the difference.
The strongest critique identifies the post hoc/correlation-causation flaw, since the conclusion about the 'most effective' way requires ruling out confounding variables.
Mau penjelasan yang menyesuaikan level anak?
Xinau AI membahas soal langkah demi langkah, menyesuaikan gaya bahasa dengan usia anak, dan menyusun latihan berikutnya berdasarkan jawaban sebelumnya.
Coba gratis 30 hari