Steven: The allowable blood alcohol

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct61% picked this

   Social drinkers who drink and drive pose a substantial threat to

   Why this is right

   Steven would say YES, because he thinks that if we lower the blood alcohol limit, thereby deterring social drinkers from drunk driving, we will significantly improve highway safety. If reducing drunk driving by social drinkers would significantly improve highway safety, then it must be that drunk driving by social drinkers currently poses a significant threat to highway safety. Migeul would say NO, because he thinks deterring social drinkers would have little effect on highway safety, and he explicitly identifies the most important aspect of the drunken driving problem as heavy drinkers. Technically, that 2nd idea is not disagreeing with the language of "substantial". Cancer is not the most common cause of death (in a non-COVID world, heart disease is), but it's still a substantial cause of death. But the 1st idea shows clear disagreement. If eliminating social drunk driving "would have little effect", then social drunk driving does not pose a substantial threat currently. There is a tendency in Disagree questions that if the disagreement is very obvious and explicit (lowering limit will greatly increase safety vs. lowering limit will not greatly increase safety), then the answer ends up testing the underlying rationale for the opposing positions, rather than the opposing positions themselves.

   Skill tested: Agree/Disagree · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   61%
2. B

   Both Probably Agree7% picked this

   There is a direct correlation between a driver’s blood alcohol level and the driver’s ability

   To the extent that both people are worried about the consequence of drunk driving, they would probably both agree that there's an important connection between a driver's blood alcohol level and their ability to drive safely. Miguel wasn't saying that "lowering the blood alcohol limit will have little effect" because he thinks that blood alcohol is unrelated to driving performance. He was saying lowering the limit will have little effect because the people with the highest blood alcohol level (heavy drinkers) are already ignoring the present limit.

   7%
3. C

   Both Probably Agree6% picked this

   A driver with a blood alcohol level above the current legal limit poses a substantial

   To the extent that both people are worried about the consequence of drunk driving, they would probably both agree that we should be worried about someone driving at a level above the current legal limit. This shouldn't seem too tempting superficially, since we know the disagreement is centered on "what would happen if we lowered the blood alcohol limit", not on what's the case with the current blood alcohol limit.

   6%
4. D

   Disagreement is Extreme17% picked this

   Some drivers whose blood alcohol level is lower than the current legal limit pose a

   Because this is so weakly worded, it's very hard to disagree with. Miguel would be our best shot, but can we infer that he believes: there is not a single driver whose blood alcohol level is lower than the current legal limit who poses a danger to the public? Disagreeing with this answer is too strong a position to be inferred from Miguel. Miguel might believe that there is a 90 year old driver whose blood alcohol level is lower than the current limit (he's totally sober), but he still poses a danger to the public because of his cataracts.

   17%
5. E

   Agreement is Extreme9% picked this

   A driver with a blood alcohol level slightly greater than half the current legal limit poses no

   Because this is so strongly worded ("no danger"), it's very hard to agree with. Can we infer that Miguel would agree to this: there is not a single driver whose blood alcohol level is slightly greater half than the current legal limit who poses a danger to the public? That sounds too strong for Miguel to sign-off on. He might believe that there is a 90 year old driver whose blood alcohol level is slightly higher than half the current limit, but he still poses a danger to the public because of his cataracts. He might believe that there is a heavy drinker who's blood alcohol level is only slightly greater than half the current limit (he just left church and hasn't started his real drinking for the day yet) that still poses a danger to the public. The author wasn't saying that social drinkers (who would be more likely to have a blood alcohol slightly greater than half the current limit) don't pose any danger. He was just saying they're not a significant source of the drunk driving problem.

   9%