Question

read ahmads argument in favor of changing the minimum driving age from 16 to 15. every year, millions of teenagers look forward to the freedom of earning their drivers license. it has been proven over time that teenagers are fully responsible by the time they are 15, and making teens wait until they are 16 to obtain a drivers license is wrong. many teenagers play sports, work jobs, and have an active social life when they are 15. it would be beneficial to the functioning of society if these people were able to independently drive themselves around. parents agree, too. most people believe that the streets would be safer if the minimum driving age were reduced to 15. what is the best evaluation of ahmads reasoning? it is illogical because it relies on faulty reasoning. it is logical because it stays on topic. it is illogical because it shows no bias. it is logical because it gives true statistics.

Explanation:

Ahmad's reasoning claims "it has been proven" teens are responsible at 15 and "most people believe" streets are safer, but provides no actual evidence or true statistics. Also, saying waiting until 16 is "wrong" without valid support is faulty. The first option notes it's illogical due to faulty reasoning. The second is wrong as the reasoning is not logical. The third is wrong because showing no bias isn't illogical, and his argument has flaws, not lack of bias. The fourth is wrong as he gives no true statistics.

Answer:

It is illogical because it relies on faulty reasoning.