In opposing the proposition "equipping cars with anti-lock brakes does not reduce accidents," an argument stating "teaching drivers to use anti-lock brakes properly, by applying them forcefully won't prevent them from overdriving the conditions" would be
A)an effect argument.
B)an inherency argument.
C)a significance argument.
D)a pre-emptive argument.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The argument is an effect argument because it claims that even with anti-lock brakes, accidents won't be reduced if drivers don't know how to use them properly. It's arguing that the intended effect (reduction in accidents) won't be achieved because of a potential problem with implementation.

In Opposing the Proposition "Equipping Cars with Anti-Lock Brakes Does