(B) Read the following excerpt from an article that appeared in the magazine section of a local daily: The ban on single-use plastic is impractical. The purpose of articles like bags and packaging is ultimately to make human life easier. Plastic articles do this well, so they shouldn't be banned. Write a paragraph to analyse the given argument.You could think about what alternative explanations might weaken the given conclusion and include rationale / evidence that would strengthen / counter the given argument.
Answers
Answer:
The reasoning being given in favour of continued usage of single-use plastic showcases both shallow (lacking depth) and myopic (short-sighted) thinking. Man tries to make life more convenient, but it is not possible to prioritise convenience all the time. For instance, stopping at traffic signals, waiting for one's turn at the doctor's clinic or even opening and shutting doors are inconvenient. However, each of these activities is important, because there are certain rules that need to be followed to avoid greater inconvenience in terms of accidents, disorganised dealing and security. Likewise, banning single-use plastic is necessary to prevent greater problems, particularly environmental issues. Single-use plastic over time is known to cause pollution, affect life on land as well as in water and upset ecosystems, which in turn can make survival of humans very difficult. Thus, if one weighs the options of convenience and survival, it becomes clear that convenience is a short term joy, while survival is a long term goal. It is evident that the argument for using such plastic is invalid.
Explanation:
Plz mark me as brainliest