Verbal Lecture-04
WEAKEN QUESTIONS:
As similar to the strengthen statement or choice, a weaken statement or choice provides new information. But unlike strengthen statement, weaken statement makes the conclusion less believable and doubtful. Because the new information casts doubt on the validity of the conclusion.
There are two types of weaken statements:
1. Do not break conclusion:
In one type, the weaken statement do not breakdown the conclusion but make the conclusion less believable. It means although this new information not necessarily break the argument, but makes the argument no more MUST be true. So a statement that makes the argument no more always true, is a true weaken statement. It casts sufficient doubt on the conclusion. If you see an answer choice that make you rethink and say yourself that “I’m not sure whether the given conclusion is MUST be drawn from the given information.” This answer choice is true weakener statement.
2. Completely breakdown the conclusion:
In second type, the weaken statement completely breakdown the conclusion. In this case, the answer choice attack on any of the assumptions of the argument, and prove it false. Because when the assumption is proven as wrong, the conclusion MUST be false. Note that an assumption is not a fact, rather it’s an opinion that the author kept in his heart while making the argument. So assumption can be challenged.
Major portion of Critical reasoning or Logical reasoning questions usually consists of weaken type of questions. These questions tests your ability to understand the argument structure, its hidden assumption and how well you can challenge the argument to prove it invalid. This is very important that the weaken statement must not question the validity of premises that are facts rather than opinion of the author. As you have learned before, a fact is always accepted as true and never be challenged. Only you can challenge opinions and assumptions.
Let’s discuss a simple example as discussed in beginners refresher:
Maria likes to swim everyday before reading a newspaper, in the morning. Therefore, she is physically fit.
Weaken type 1:
The following statement (or answer choice) do not break down the conclusion, but make it doubtful or less believable.
Not every person who swim daily in the morning is physically fit.
This statement creates the possibility that Maria might not be physically fit. After reading this statement in addition to the argument, you start saying that whether Maria is physically fit is now doubtful. Hence, although this statement not completely breakdown the conclusion, it makes the conclusion doubtful and therefore, not MUST be true. And remember, you have learned it before as well, that conclusion is a statement that MUST be true. Thus, if that statement no more MUST be true, it will no more a valid conclusion.
Weaken type 2:
The following statement completely breakdown the conclusion.
Maria like to swim daily in the morning, but practically she swim only twice a week.
This statement attached on the assumption of the argument, which assumed that if Maria likes to swim daily in the morning, she actually do it daily. But according to the conclusion to hold true, Maria MUST swim daily in the morning, rather than twice a week. Thus, this statement completely breakdown the conclusion.
Similarly,
Some people swim daily in the morning, because they are not physically fit and they need to improve their fitness.
This statement attacks on the assumption that “No person can swim daily in the morning due to having poor fitness level”. Similarly there are many other statements that can weaken the given argument.
Now, let’s do a technical question after understanding simple question scenario:
Samsung is always praised for making light phones with beautiful and responsive touch screens. Therefore, the company’s newly released smartphone ‘Captivate’ containing a large super AMOLED 4.3″ display will surely be praised and hence will be a sure shot success.
Following two statement will weaken the conclusion and hence weaken the whole argument:
I. Large super AMOLED display adds 50 grams weight to the weight of phone.
II. Large super AMOLED display adds too much weight that people do not like.
Explanation:
Statement I: It makes the conclusion doubtful. You are forced to re-evaluate the conclusion and think whether addition of 50 grams weight is enough to to increase the weight of this phone to the level where people do not like.
Statement II: It completely breakdown the conclusion by attacking the assumption that this phone has enough weight that people do not usually like.
Characteristics of correct weaken answer choices:
1. It refutes the conclusion either by destroying the argument completely, or by creating sufficient doubt that the conclusion need to be re-evaluated.
2. It introduces new information.
Let’s learn how to weaken a inductive reasoning argument:
David joined Genesis fitness gym to improve his stamina. Since then, he significantly improved his running speed. Therefore, anybody who wants to improve running speed should join Genesis fitness gym.
The following statements weaken the argument above:
I. David did not attend Genesis fitness gym since he joined the gym. Breaks the argument completely.
II. David is among several persons who joined the Genesis fitness gym but only David was the only person whose running speed was increased.
III. David attribute his running speed increment to his friends who daily play running competition with each other for fitness purpose.
Explanation:
Statement I: This statement completely breakdown the conclusion by attacking on the assumption that “David has attended the Genesis fitness gym daily since he joined it.”
Statement II: Although this statement does not breakdown the conclusion but raises sufficient doubt about the conclusion by saying that “Joining Genesis fitness gym is not the reason for David fitness.”. Thus Genesis fitness gym might not improve fitness to everyone.
Statement III: Again this statement breakdown the conclusion completely by challenging the assumption that “David fitness was due to his joining the Genesis fitness gym.”
Characteristics of incorrect weaken answer choices:
1. Out of scope statement, which provides new information but is irrelevant to the argument.
2. Strengthen statement, which actually strengthen the conclusion instead of weaken it.
3. Statement that contains similar wording of premises or that entice with the wording but is irrelevant to the argument.
Cause & Effect arguments:
As we have discussed this topic in assumption lecture. There are three possible assumptions that can be assumed if a causality happen to appear in the conclusion of the argument i.e inductive reasoning.
1. Cause happened before effect
2. Effect did not cause the Cause
3. No alternative reason for the effect.
To weaken this assumption, it is simple to negate any of the above. This will breakdown the conclusion and hence weaken the argument as a whole. That’s what our objective is. i.e
1. Effect happen before the cause.
2. Effect caused the “Cause”
3. There’s some other reason for the effect, but not mare due to the “Cause”.
For instance:
Last year P&G’s profit doubled when it increased its prices by 15%. Thus doubling of profits at P&G must be due to increase in its price.
All of the following weaken the argument EXCEPT?
I. The price was increased in second half of the year, while majority of profit were realized in the first half.
II. The CEO announced the price increment after P&G had realized twice as much profit as they had done the previous year and was struggling to meet demand.
III. Most of the P&G profits is due to increase in sales of Gillete.
IV. Price increment was happened due to abrupt increase in demand of P&G’s products.
Solution:
Statement I: This clearly weaken the conclusion by challenging the assumption that “Cause happen after effect”.
Statement II: This also weaken the conclusion by challenging the same assumption.
Statement III: This statement weaken the conclusion y challenging another assumption that “The effect was due to an alternate cause”.
Statement IV: We are only left with last statement, that should be the correct answer. And this statement is out of scope, because identifying the cause of the “Cause” is irrelevant. So, this statement does not weaken the argument and, thus, the correct answer choice.
Similarly,
Over the past decade, the engine power of Chevy Cobalt has increased from 200 to 300 hp. During the same time period, its fuel efficiency has increased from 23 to 25 mpg. Thus, it can be concluded that the increase in fuel efficiency for Chevy cars has led to the increase in the engine power.
All of the following weaken the argument above EXCEPT?
I. A major component change was required to increase the engine power of Chevy Cobalt from 250 to 300 horsepower; however, after this change, it only took minor adjustments in the design to increase the fuel efficiency from 24 to 25 miles per gallon.
II. Galvanized zinc engine that allow for increase in horsepower to be delivered to the wheel have led to the improvement in fuel efficiency from 23 miles per gallon to 25 miles per gallon.
III. The increased engine power in Chevy Cobalt is attributed to the fuel intake system.
IV. New aerodynamic design of Chevy Camaro has increased its fuel efficiency from 24 to 28 from the same 250 horsepower engine.
V. The power output of Chevy Cobalt turbo has increased from 300 to 500 hp, while the fuel efficiency has been stagnant at 15mpg.
VI. The fuel efficiency of any car is not enhanced by enhancing the power engine of the car.
Choice I: It presents an instance when the identified cause took place after the identified effect. This is simply enough to weaken the argument.
Choice II: This choice reverses the stated causality, and therefore, is a weaken statement.
Choice III: It provides evidence which indicates that some other cause was responsible for the stated effect. This choice indicates that the fuel intake system is responsible for increase in engine power.
Choice IV: It provides an example in which the causal relationship did not hold true because the cause happened but it did not lead to the effect.
Choice V: It shows that effect happened but the cause did not happened, which is simply enough to proof that the conclusion is weakened. Because the given cause has proven wrong from being the reason to get effect.
Choice VI: This is the only choice left and hence is the correct answer. This statement, in fact, strengthen the conclusion of the argument by stating its assumption that “Effect did not caused the ‘Cause'”.
Similarly,
A recent study by Wall Street Journal found that CEOs on average are much more aggressive than other executives in a company. Hence the study concluded that top executives who have an aggressive attitude are much more likely to be promoted to the position of the CEO.
Which of the following cast the most doubt on the conclusion of the study?
I. A recent study of top 500 companies concluded that some corporations have executives who are more aggressive than their respective CEO.
II. Studies of top 500 companies show that more aggressive executives are better leaders.
III. In an interview with CEOs, the participants confessed that after taking the post of CEO, they have to become aggressive to ensure that the executive team follows their directions.
IV. A recent study of Newsweek concluded that the CEO on an average are more aggressive in their second year than in their first year.
V. The most aggressive of CEOs are not as effective in delivering the financial results as their counterparts.
Solution:
Choice I: This re-states the premise, which indicates that CEOs are typically are more aggressive than other executives. This implies that there are some executives who are more aggressive than their CEOs. So it is not weaken statement.
Choice II: This choice is out of scope, and hence not a weaken statement.
Choice III: This choice cast doubt on the causality relationship. It shows that the established effect happens before the established cause. Thus this choice is clearly correct answer.
Choice IV: This choice is again out of scope, thus is not a weaken statement.
Choice V: This choice is also out of scope, because the argument is not concerned about whether aggressive CEOs are effective.