Your Time has Finished

Close

    Close

    Your Score: %

    Average Score of All Users:

    You performed better than of students

    Section Breakdown

    Your Score Average of all Users Percentile
    Official TSA Flaws Questions (2008-2019)

    Official TSA Flaws Questions (2008-2019)

    Your score:

    Average score:

    You performed better than of students

    Speed as well as accuracy is important in this section. Work quickly, or you might not finish the paper. There are no penalties for incorrect responses, only marks for correct answers, so you should attempt all questions. Each question is worth one mark.

    Calculators are NOT permitted.

    Here you will find all TSA Flaws questions that have been written 2008-2019.

    Over the past ten years, there has been a four-fold increase in the number of people killed in road accidents who are found to have illegal drugs in their bodies. The rate of increase is much greater than the corresponding rate for those people killed in accidents who were found with alcohol in their blood. This shows that the campaign against drink-driving has succeeded. Consequently, the Government ought now to concentrate on targeting those people who drive whilst under the influence of illegal drugs.

    3. Which of the following is the best statement of the flaw in the argument above?
    • 0
    0

    Explanation

    The correct answer is D.

    Passage is discussing how number of drug-related road deaths have increase more than drink-driving deaths in the past few years. The conclusion here is that the campaigns for drink-driving have been successful and thus it is time to begin campaigns against drug related driving

    The answer here is D because it points out that the reasoning is flawed. Because we have no information on how much drink driving deaths would have increased without campaigns, we cannot say that drug driving has increased more because of the campaigns being successful.

    B&E are completely irrelevant

    Both A and C would weaken the argument because they refer to the chance that a campaign against driving on drugs may not be as successful as one that is against drunk driving so they can be seen as counterarguments rather than flaws

    Post Comment