Evaluating Pro-Development Argument

Hard Synthesis Of Information Evaluating Arguments

In a recent debate over urban development versus environmental conservation, two opposing viewpoints were presented. On one side, a pro-development advocate argued that urban expansion is essential for economic growth, offering statistics that showcase job creation and increased tax revenues. They claimed that developing previously unused land would provide the housing and infrastructure needed for burgeoning populations.

Conversely, an environmentalist countered that such development would lead to significant ecological damage, citing studies that link urban sprawl to habitat destruction and increased carbon emissions. They emphasized the long-term costs related to climate change, arguing that preserving green spaces is crucial for maintaining biodiversity and combating climate change.

Given these arguments, which option best evaluates the overall effectiveness of the pro-development advocate's reasoning?

The argument effectively supports economic growth, but neglects potential environmental repercussions.

The argument is strong as it presents clear data that demonstrates job creation and economic benefits without acknowledging any opposing views.

The argument provides a solid case for development but fails to consider the ethical implications of urban expansion.

The argument is well-rounded, actively addressing concerns about environmental impact while promoting urban growth.

The argument misrepresents environmental studies to undermine conservation efforts.

Hint

Submitted2.9K

Correct2.6K

% Correct92%