SDCAR2010【逻辑入门】（六）Weaken

sdcar2010

Parts I would like to cover in the future:
Flaw (part 2)
Inference
Parallel Reasoning

perain

Hi SDCAR,

Here is a weakening question at which I found in the forum:


Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods when the Darfir Republic's currency, the pundra, was weak:its value was unusually low relative to the world's most stable currencies.Both times a weak pundra made Darfir's manufactured products a bargain on world markets, and Darfir's exports were up substantially.Now some politicians are saying that, in order to cause another similarly sized increase in exports, the government should allow the pundra to become weak again.

Which of the following, if true, provides the government with the strongest grounds to doubt that the politicians' recommendation, if followed, will achieve its aim?

(A) Several of the politicians now recommending that the pundra be allowed to become weak made that same recommendation before each of the last two periods of currency weakness.

(B) After several decades of operating well below peak capacity, Darfir's manufacturing sector is now operating at near-peak levels.

(C) The economy of a country experiencing a rise in exports will become healthier only if the country's currency is strong or the rise in exports is significant.

(D) Those countries whose manufactured products compete with Darfir's on the world market all currently have stable currencies.

(E) A sharp improvement in the efficiency of Darfir's manufacturing plants would make Darfir's products a bargain on world markets even without any weakening of the pundra relative to other currencies.

My doubt is that B and E both can be used to refute the politicians, but how to choose a better one as the anwser? Thanks~~~

jianaozhonghua

plus one thing here:

if you don't know how to seperate the premise and conclusion from anything else. just watch the answer of each OG CR question. the "situation" in the answer is exactly the "premise -- main conclusion" link.

horsecc

(E) A sharp improvement in the efficiency of Darfir's manufacturing plants would make Darfir's products a bargain on world markets even without any weakening of the pundra relative to other currencies.

Maybe a weakening could make the products more attractive

sdcar2010

Hi SDCAR,

Here is a weakening question at which I found in the forum:


Twelve years ago and again five years ago, there were extended periods when the Darfir Republic's currency, the pundra, was weak:its value was unusually low relative to the world's most stable currencies.Both times a weak pundra made Darfir's manufactured products a bargain on world markets, and Darfir's exports were up substantially.Now some politicians are saying that, in order to cause another similarly sized increase in exports, the government should allow the pundra to become weak again.

Which of the following, if true, provides the government with the strongest grounds to doubt that the politicians' recommendation, if followed, will achieve its aim?

(A) Several of the politicians now recommending that the pundra be allowed to become weak made that same recommendation before each of the last two periods of currency weakness.

(B) After several decades of operating well below peak capacity, Darfir's manufacturing sector is now operating at near-peak levels.

(C) The economy of a country experiencing a rise in exports will become healthier only if the country's currency is strong or the rise in exports is significant.

(D) Those countries whose manufactured products compete with Darfir's on the world market all currently have stable currencies.

(E) A sharp improvement in the efficiency of Darfir's manufacturing plants would make Darfir's products a bargain on world markets even without any weakening of the pundra relative to other currencies.

My doubt is that B and E both can be used to refute the politicians, but how to choose a better one as the anwser? Thanks~~~

-- by 会员 perain (2011/6/30 11:16:38)

This is a tough CR question. The key is analyzing the two possible choices in the backdrops of the question prompt.

B) says that even if the currency is weakened, the export will not increase because the manufacture industry reaches its top. So B) efinitely weakens the politician's argument.

E) points out an alternative way of increasing export. But it does not refute the politician's argument that devalue the currency will increase export. The politician's argument still holds.

rikkyqin

好厉害啊楼主真是佩服了
很有用的分析谢谢

perain

Thanks SDCAR! MY CR has improved a lot since reading your post.

qiushuan

"Still another: “Mr. Zhang recently had a big fight with our current finance VP during a M&A discussion.” Notice, this evidence is unrelated to the original premises; it has nothing to do with Wall Street. So do not skip an answer choice because it does not address the points raised in the original argument. Focus on the new unfavorable light shining on the conclusion."

is that mean this is not a right answer to choose? sorry...i have difficulty in understand this part. could u explain it more?

sdcar2010

"Still another: “Mr. Zhang recently had a big fight with our current finance VP during a M&A discussion.” Notice, this evidence is unrelated to the original premises; it has nothing to do with Wall Street. So do not skip an answer choice because it does not address the points raised in the original argument. Focus on the new unfavorable light shining on the conclusion."

is that mean this is not a right answer to choose? sorry...i have difficulty in understand this part. could u explain it more?

-- by 会员 qiushuan (2011/7/4 14:33:15)

This is still a correct answer to weaken the argument since it sheds unfavorable light thereon.

Vicky90

So do not skip an answer choice because it does not address the points raised in the original argument. Focus on the new unfavorable light shining on the conclusion.

          求解释呀~~    OTL  
万分感谢。。