Can you please explain this using POE?
In countries where automobile insurance
includes compensation for whiplash injuries
sustained in automobile accidents, reports of
having suffered such injuries are twice as
frequent as they are in countries where whiplash
is not covered. Presently, no objective test for
whiplash exists, so it is true that spurious reports of
whiplash injuries cannot be readily identifi ed.
Nevertheless, these facts do not warrant the
conclusion drawn by some commentators that in the
countries with the higher rates of reported whiplash
injuries, half of the reported cases are spurious.
Clearly, in countries where automobile insurance
does not include compensation for whiplash,
people often have little incentive to report
whiplash injuries that they actually have suffered.
In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play
which of the following roles?
(A) The first is a claim that the argument disputes;
the second is a conclusion that has been based
on that claim.
(B) The first is a claim that has been used to
support a conclusion that the argument accepts;
the second is that conclusion.
(C) The first is evidence that has been used to
support a conclusion for which the argument
provides further evidence; the second is the
main conclusion of the argument.
(D) The first is a finding whose implications are at
issue in the argument; the second is a claim
presented in order to argue against deriving
certain implications from that finding.
(E) The first is a finding whose accuracy is evaluated
in the argument; the second is evidence
presented to establish that the finding is
accurate.
In countries where automobile insurance
includes compensation for whiplash injuries
sustained in automobile accidents, reports of
having suffered such injuries are twice as
frequent as they are in countries where whiplash
is not covered. Presently, no objective test for
whiplash exists, so it is true that spurious reports of
whiplash injuries cannot be readily identifi ed.
Nevertheless, these facts do not warrant the
conclusion drawn by some commentators that in the
countries with the higher rates of reported whiplash
injuries, half of the reported cases are spurious.
Clearly, in countries where automobile insurance
does not include compensation for whiplash,
people often have little incentive to report
whiplash injuries that they actually have suffered.
In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play
which of the following roles?
(A) The first is a claim that the argument disputes;
the second is a conclusion that has been based
on that claim.
(B) The first is a claim that has been used to
support a conclusion that the argument accepts;
the second is that conclusion.
(C) The first is evidence that has been used to
support a conclusion for which the argument
provides further evidence; the second is the
main conclusion of the argument.
(D) The first is a finding whose implications are at
issue in the argument; the second is a claim
presented in order to argue against deriving
certain implications from that finding.
(E) The first is a finding whose accuracy is evaluated
in the argument; the second is evidence
presented to establish that the finding is
accurate.
