Critical Reasoning

Administrators at a local college recently passed a mandatory recycling rule for all faculty and staff. Campus offices will be provided with bins for sorting paper, plastic, and glass, and employees will be subject to reprimand if recyclables are routinely found in their trash bins. The college president said in a statement that he hopes not only to make the campus more environmentally friendly, but also to set a good example for students, so that they will develop a habit of recycling even when they are not on campus.

Which of the following is most like the college president's stated reasons for the recycling rule in logical structure?


A) Parents punish their children when they fail to brush their teeth because they want the children to begin habits that will lead to healthy teeth and gums.
B) Health departments enforce rules that restaurants must post signs in restrooms reminding employees they are required to wash their hands before returning to work, protecting the public health both by assuring that employees practice good hygiene and by encouraging members of the public to do the same.
C) Library policies state a penalty for returning borrowed books past their due date in order to assure that as many eople as possible have access to the books they wish to read.
D) City sanitation crews post notices near sewers that drain rainwater to the local river announcing a penalty for dumping waste or motor oil.
E) A state legislature passes a law requiring local factories to reduce the amount of pollutants released into the atmosphere or the local watershed area in order to prevent damage to wildlife habitats.

[spoiler]OA I doubt![/spoiler]

is it B.

IMO B .

Because the objective of argument is to set an example for the students , similar is the case in option B wherein example is set for the common public.

OA is indeed B, but what is wrong with A.

is the analogy not drawn between "reprimanding" and punishing in the given and choice A ??

Arora,

In the question there are 3 entities involved.

Administrators - staff -students.

in option B -3 entities

Health dep - restaurants - members of public.

where as option A only has two entities.

Parents - children.

This is one of the criteria in opting B.

Thankx,
Jaxis.

arora007 wrote:OA is indeed B, but what is wrong with A.

is the analogy not drawn between "reprimanding" and punishing in the given and choice A ??

I would like to explain that in the following way : -

There are three parties considered "Adminstrators" [consider them as P] who are mandating certain actions , "staff + faculty"[consider them as Q] on whom the actions are mandated and "students"[consider them as R] to whom example is set by implementing action on "staff+ faculty".

Reprimand case :- Employees i.e "Q" being punished by "P". No role of "R" here in reprimand case.

Option A says that "P" punish "R" so there is no Q, and no example being set in this case.

Hope i have not made it complicated and it helps.

I picked B coz 'setting an example' stuck in my head after reading this + there are 2 entities...

Setting an example for students <-----> encourage public....

thanks guys!!

IMO B