Question

I. Yes: Studies have shown that breathing in vehicular pollution reaches dangerous levels when the exposure is more than five hours a day.
II. No: Breathing in vehicular pollution for more than five hours a day does not lead to lung cancer as revealed in a study analyzing vehicular pollution.
Which statement is strong?

• A. Only I is strong.
• B. Only II is strong.
• C. Both I and II are strong.
• D. Neither I nor II are strong.

Hint:

When evaluating strong/weak arguments, check if the statement directly addresses the issue with relevant and complete reasoning. A narrow or incomplete counterpoint is usually weak.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is A

Step 1: Evaluate Statement I.
Statement I is backed by a study showing that pollution exposure of more than five hours is dangerous. It directly relates to health risks, is precise, and provides a strong reason for the “Yes” side of the argument. Hence, I is strong.
Step 2: Evaluate Statement II.
Statement II claims no link between exposure and lung cancer. However, this is not a strong counterargument because “dangerous levels” of vehicular pollution may cause many other health hazards beyond lung cancer (e.g., asthma, bronchitis, respiratory problems). By focusing only on lung cancer, it misses the broader health implications. Thus, Statement II is weak.
Step 3: Conclusion.
Since only Statement I is well-supported, the correct choice is (a).
\(\boxed{\text{Only I is strong}}\)