Introduction / Context:
The proposal is radical: a single university for an entire country. We evaluate whether each argument meaningfully supports or opposes the proposal, keeping in mind feasibility and objectives like uniformity and comparability of degrees.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- I claims “only one way” to uniformity — an absolute claim.
- II highlights administrative impossibility — feasibility concern.
- III suggests degrees would be comparable for jobs — an intended benefit.
Concept / Approach:
- Strong arguments either demonstrate feasibility or articulate a substantive benefit linked to the proposal.
- Absolute claims (“only way”) tend to be weak unless necessity is proven.
Step-by-Step Solution:
I is weak: Uniformity could be achieved through accreditation, standardized curricula, and national assessments; a single university is not the “only way.”II is strong: Administering a single university for a vast nation is practically untenable; logistics, governance, and academic autonomy pose major barriers.III is strong as a pro argument: If one awarding body issues degrees, comparability indeed becomes straightforward for recruiters. While not necessary to achieve comparability, it is a real benefit tied to the proposal, thus a strong supportive point.
Verification / Alternative check:
Countries achieve comparability via national frameworks; nonetheless, III correctly states a benefit of the single-university scenario.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Only I&II or I&III / All / None: Misjudge I’s overstatement or ignore III’s relevance.
Common Pitfalls:
Treating a benefit as the only possible method; ignoring feasibility constraints.
Final Answer:
Only II and III are strong
Discussion & Comments