PrepTest 123, Section 3, Question 21
By Brandon Beaver | Published October 29, 2024
Type: Weaken
Difficulty:
Explanations
Start with the conclusion: Meat will soon be morally unacceptable. Why does the author think that’s true? Can you find anything in the passage speaking to morality? No? Me either.
So, we know the missing piece: “If [the premises are true, indicating that] producing food of one type will become too difficult, then eating that type of food will soon be morally acceptable.” To weaken this argument, just say that the assumption is false.
A
Healthfulness is not mentioned.
B
Well that isn’t the weakness I pointed out, but yeah, that’s another issue with the argument. The author takes issue with raising cattle (1) with grain and (2) by using farmland that’s going out of production. Some types of meat, however, can be raised in places where (1) grain isn’t needed and (2) farmland isn’t being wasted.
C
This strengthens (albeit minimally).
D
This does nothing. This proposes a “solution” that no one wants to put in practice.
E
The author isn’t suggesting we all switch to a grain diet. The author is simply saying that sixteen pounds of grain is better than one pound of meat. The author doesn’t say to only eat those sixteen pounds of grain, however!
Passage
Ethicist: On average, animals raised on grain must be fed sixteen pounds of grain to produce one pound of meat. A pound of meat is more nutritious for humans than a pound of grain, but sixteen pounds of grain could feed many more people than could a pound of meat. With grain yields leveling off, large areas of farmland going out of production each year, and the population rapidly expanding, we must accept the fact that consumption of meat will soon be morally unacceptable.
Question 21
Which one of the following, if true, would most weaken the ethicist's argument?
Even though it has been established that a vegetarian diet can be healthy, many people prefer to eat meat and are willing to pay for it.
Often, cattle or sheep can be raised to maturity on grass from pastureland that is unsuitable for any other kind of farming.
If a grain diet is supplemented with protein derived from non-animal sources, it can have nutritional value equivalent to that of a diet containing meat.
Although prime farmland near metropolitan areas is being lost rapidly to suburban development, we could reverse this trend by choosing to live in areas that are already urban.
Nutritionists agree that a diet composed solely of grain products is not adequate for human health.