{"id":127,"date":"2017-04-12T08:08:54","date_gmt":"2017-04-12T13:08:54","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/grockit.com\/gmat\/?p=127"},"modified":"2020-09-11T20:42:20","modified_gmt":"2020-09-11T20:42:20","slug":"conquering-your-weakeners-on-gmat-critical-reasoning","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/wpapp.kaptest.com\/study\/gmat\/conquering-your-weakeners-on-gmat-critical-reasoning\/","title":{"rendered":"GMAT Critical Reasoning: Weaken Questions"},"content":{"rendered":"

The flipside of the \u201cstrengthen\u201d question coin on the GMAT is the \u201cweaken\u201d question. The same set of evidence and conclusion can easily be used for either question type, so it\u2019s always a good idea to start by reading the question itself first, to determine the task before you go to the argument. After that, your approach is almost identical to the way that you would approach a strengthen question. Take this question, for example:
\n\t

\t\t

\nHealica, a new drug that can cure a common disease that until now has been fatal for 50% of those infected, is made from the root of the New Zealand banananut tree. The banananut tree is rare in New Zealand, and large quantities of the root are necessary in order to make Healica. Therefore, if Healica remains in production, the banananut tree will eventually become extinct.
\nIf true, which of the following most calls into question the conclusion above?<\/p>\n

\n

a) The company that holds the patent to Healica has exclusive rights to produce the drug for another 10 years.
\nb) Healica is expensive, and is not currently covered by most major insurance plans.
\nc) Banananut leaves are considered a gourmet delicacy in many parts of the world.
\nd) The banananut tree, although native to New Zealand, can easily be grown in other parts of the world.
\ne) Producing Healica is time-consuming and expensive for the drug manufacturer.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\n<\/div><\/div>
\nYou should always read the question first, and here the commonly-used phrase \u201ccalls into question\u201d means that this question is asking for a weakener.
\nLooking at the argument, we can see from the clue word \u201ctherefore\u201d that the conclusion is the last sentence of the argument: \u201cif Healica remains in production, the banananut tree will eventually become extinct.\u201d Now our job is to find a way to attack the argument, and the easiest way to do that is to identify an existing weakness and exploit it.
\nHere, as in many arguments on the GMAT, the argument has an unstated assumption. The evidence states that the banananut tree is \u201crare in New Zealand,\u201d and concludes that extinction will occur because of that. But for something to be extinct, it must not exist anywhere in the world, and we only have evidence about the tree\u2019s growth in one country. The unstated assumptions are that the tree doesn\u2019t grow anywhere else, and that growth can\u2019t keep up with the demand for the trees. A great way to weaken the argument, then, is to attack one of those assumptions.
\n

Evaluating the Answer Choices<\/h4>
<\/div><\/div><\/div>
\na) The company that holds the patent to Healica has exclusive rights to produce the drug for another 10 years.<\/strong>
\nThis choice would require another assumption in order to weaken the conclusion: that the one company producing Healica would not produce enough of it to kill off the banananut tree. Weakeners, like strengtheners, shouldn\u2019t require so much work to fit into the argument.
\nb) Healica is expensive, and is not currently covered by most major insurance plans.<\/strong>
\nThis choice, like choice a), is not closely enough related to the argument.
\nc) Banananut leaves are considered a gourmet delicacy in many parts of the world.<\/strong>
\nThis choice makes it more likely that the trees will be in demand and will face extinction. The argument is strengthened, not weakened, by this choice.
\nd) The banananut tree, although native to New Zealand, can easily be grown in other parts of the world.<\/strong>
\nThis is the correct answer, since it exploits the unstated assumptions by explicitly disproving that one of them.
\ne) Producing Healica is time-consuming and expensive for the drug manufacturer.<\/strong>
\nThis choice has the same problem as choices a) and b): it takes extra assumptions to fit it into the argument, and that\u2019s not what we want.
\nIf you find yourself taking several extra logical steps to explain how an answer choice relates back to the argument and makes the conclusion less likely to follow from the evidence, then the answer choice is probably not close enough to the text of the argument as written. The test is written so that each question belongs in its own little world, and outside knowledge is rarely relevant to finding the correct answer.
\n 
\n