- Thu Dec 01, 2016 9:22 pm
#31107
4. Point at issue
Monroe's conclusion: Our organization’s project has been a failure.
Monroe's first premise: Our stated goal was to reduce the maximum number of homes in the comm. that lacked electricity.
Monroe's second premise: At the end of the project, about 2,000 homes still don’t have electricity.
Wilkinson's conclusion: Bringing 3,000 homes electricity surely counts as a success.
Wilkinson's first premise: At the beginning of the project, 5,000 homes did not have electricity.
Pre-phrase: Monroe believes the organization failed entirely (i.e. the glass is half-empty) while Wilkinson believes that some success was achieved (i.e. the glass is half-full).
a. Incorrect. Both Monroe and Wilkinson agreed that 2,000 homes still don’t have electricity.
b. Incorrect. This is Wilkinson’s premise (thus he draws support from it) and one that Monroe does not contest.
c. Incorrect. Monroe’s argument was about “reduc[ing] as much as possible the number of homes.” This answer choice exaggerates his argument by writing, “if any home in the community has no electricity, the project must be considered a failure.” Thus, neither Monroe nor Wilkinson would presumably agree with this.
d. Incorrect. Both Monroe (explicitly) and Wilkinson (implicitly) agree that the organization’s goal was to reduce the number of homes that lacked electricity. In other words, the disagreement is about interpreting the results of their work and not the organization's stated purpose.
e. Correct. Monroe concludes that “[the] project has been a failure…[since] approximately 2,000 homes are still without electricity.” Whereas, Wilkinson sees the glass half-full and concludes that “brining electricity to around 3,000 homes counts as a success.”