Question at position 1 Electric cars have been proven cost-effective and environmentally friendly. Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles share the same similarities with electric cars in zero-emission technology and energy efficiency. Therefore, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are likely cost- effective and environmentally friendly. This argument is an example of _______________ neither from the given optionsargument by definition, inductive, valid, sound argumentargument by authority, deductive, strong, cogent argumentargument by analogy, inductive, strong, cogent argument单项选择题
A
neither from the given options
B
argument by definition, inductive, valid, sound argument
C
argument by authority, deductive, strong, cogent argument
D
argument by analogy, inductive, strong, cogent argument

Question

Question at position 1 Electric cars have been proven cost-effective and environmentally friendly. Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles share the same similarities with electric cars in zero-emission technology and energy efficiency. Therefore, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are likely cost- effective and environmentally friendly. This argument is an example of _______________ neither from the given optionsargument by definition, inductive, valid, sound argumentargument by authority, deductive, strong, cogent argumentargument by analogy, inductive, strong, cogent argument单项选择题

A

neither from the given options

B

argument by definition, inductive, valid, sound argument

C

argument by authority, deductive, strong, cogent argument

D

argument by analogy, inductive, strong, cogent argument

BlackTom AI · Accepted Answer

This is an argument by analogy: it infers that hydrogen fuel cell vehicles will be cost-effective and environmentally friendly because they share key features with electric cars that are known to have those benefits.

1) Relevant knowledge points and concepts
- Argument by analogy: draws a conclusion about one thing (hydrogen vehicles) based on its similarity to another (electric cars).
- Inductive reasoning: analogical arguments are inductive — they provide probabilistic support, not logical certainty.
- Strength vs. cogency: a strong inductive argument gives high probability to its conclusion; a cogent argument is strong and has true/reliable premises.
- Validity/soundness apply to deductive arguments, not to inductive analogies.

2) Step-by-step reasoning
- Premise 1: Electric cars are cost-effective and environmentally friendly (given).
- Premise 2: Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles share the same similarities with electric cars in zero-emission technology and energy efficiency (given).
- Inferential move: Because two vehicle types share the relevant features that explain the desirable outcomes in electric cars, it is probable that hydrogen vehicles will exhibit similar outcomes.
- Conclusion: Therefore, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are likely cost-effective and environmentally friendly.

3) Calculations/intermediate steps
- No numerical calculation is required; the evaluation is conceptual: similarity in causally relevant traits (zero emissions, energy efficiency) raises the probability of similar practical results.

4) Why the correct answer is correct
- The structure is clearly analogical (similar properties → similar effects). That makes it inductive. Given the premises assert plausible, relevant similarities and a reliable example, the analogy provides strong support; if the premises are true, the argument is cogent (strong + true premises).

5) Why other options are incorrect
- “Neither from the given options”: incorrect because one of the options matches precisely.
- “Argument by definition, inductive, valid, sound”: an argument by definition is not being used; validity and soundness are deductive terms and don’t apply.
- “Argument by authority, deductive, strong, cogent”: the argument is not appealing to an authority and is not deductive.