Fire ants from Brazil now

Answer choices

1. A

   Assumed9% picked this

   The imported insects would not prove more damaging to the environment in the United States than are

   This has the classic defender "not". The argument stands on the assumption that the Brazilian predator insects won’t cause more damage than the fire ants. If they turned out to be more damaging, that would basically contradict our goal. Negating this gives us the "plan will backfire" objection.

   9%
2. B

   Assumed5% picked this

   The predator insects from Brazil could survive in the ecological environment found in

   This is necessary because if the predators can't survive, they obviously can't fulfill their role in controlling the ant population. Negating this gives us the "plan isn't feasible" objection.

   5%
3. C

   Assumed8% picked this

   The especially aggressive fire ants from the two-queen nests would not be able to destroy

   Again, we see the Defender "not", so we negate and ask if it would weaken if "the fire ants ARE able to destroy the predator insects". Of course, that would mean the Plan failed. This negation gives us a "plan isn't feasible" objection.

   8%
4. D

   Correct71% picked this

   The predator insects would stop the increase of the ant population before the ants spread to states

   Why this is right

   This choice is different from the others as it introduces a specific prediction about geographic spread. Whether or not the ants are stopped before spreading further north isn’t necessary to claim that importing predators would benefit the environment overall. The statement is thus not necessarily required for the argument. If we negate this and say that "the ants would manage to spread farther north before the predators could stop them", it does sound bad, but not hopeless. The predators could still eventually stop the increase. We might just have to bring them to the north also.

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

   71%
5. E

   Assumed7% picked this

   The rate of increase of the fire-ant population would not exceed the rate at which the predator insects

   If the fire ants multiply faster than they are controlled by predators, the plan fails. The predators wouldn't actually be able to subdue the ants, because the ants' population would be ever-growing.

   7%