Difficulty: Medium
Correct Answer: if only Argument I is strong
Explanation:
Introduction / Context:Parental engagement is often linked to better bonding and development. Strong arguments should connect to these outcomes rather than conjectural fears about “lost distance.”
Given Data / Assumptions:
Concept / Approach:Argument I directly cites companionship as a developmental and relational benefit—specific and relevant. Argument II predicts a negative effect (lost distance/respect) without necessity or mechanism; boundaries can be maintained through consistent parenting, so it is weak.
Step-by-Step Solution:
I: Strong—supports the statement with clear relational benefits.II: Weak—unsupported universal risk; confuses warmth with loss of authority.Verification / Alternative check:Many parenting frameworks encourage guided play while preserving roles, supporting I and undermining II’s inevitability claim.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:“Either” would treat II as strong; “Neither” ignores I’s strength.
Common Pitfalls:Assuming affection undermines authority rather than complementing it.
Final Answer:if only Argument I is strong.
Discussion & Comments