Lobsters and other crustaceans eaten

Answer choices

1. A

   No Impact8% picked this

   Contaminants in the harbor other than sewage are equally harmful

   If anything, this strengthens. It's kinda like, "What's the point in sparing them of Disease X when Disease Y is gonna get them anyway?" Mostly, we would just say that bringing up contaminants besides sewage is out of scope, since we're only debating whether or not something positive would be achieved by getting rid of the sewage. Other than sewage = classic Out of Scope wording

   8%
2. B

   Irrelevant Comparison16% picked this

   Lobsters, like other crustaceans, live longer in the open ocean than

   We might even say this strengthens, since our author's current case is that it's fine that these lobsters are getting gill diseases since they'll die before they'll ever suffer from the disease. This answer makes it sound like if we re-routed the sewage to the open ocean, then lobsters out there might contract the disease and live long enough to suffer from it. Our author might be able to argue that this proposal is not only pointless, but it would actually lead to MORE lobster and crustacean suffering.

   16%
3. C

   Strengthens11% picked this

   Lobsters breed as readily in sewage-contaminated water as in

   If this had said lobsters don't breed as readily in sewage-contaminated water, then we would have a Weakener. We could argue, "It's not pointless to get rid of sewage -- yes they don't suffer from the gill diseases the sewage gives them, but the sewage is slowing down their reproductive rate, so if we re-routed the sewage we would have more delicious lobsters to catch."

   11%
4. D

   Out of Scope4% picked this

   Gill diseases cannot be detected by examining the surface of

   It's hard to sense any impact one way or the other on this argument whether gill diseases can / can't be detected on the surface of the lobster. If you have to look inside the lobster's mouth to detect the disease, is that really a game-changer? Do we even care about detecting the diseases?

   4%
5. E

   Correct62% picked this

   Humans often become ill as a result of eating lobsters with

   Why this is right

   This allows us to argue that there would be some point to re-routing sewage: yes, we don't need to do it for the lobsters, since they don't live long enough to suffer from the gill diseases they contract from the sewage ... but .... we should do it for the humans who eat lobsters, so that not as many humans get sick from eating diseased lobsters.

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

   62%