Critical Reasoning

Advertisement:
The world's best coffee beans come from Colombia. The more Colombian beans in a blend of coffee, the better the blend, and no company purchases more Colombian beans than Kreemo Coffee, Inc. So it only stands to reason that if you buy a can of Kreemo's coffee, you're buying the best blended coffee available today.
GO ON TO THE NEXT PAGE.
The reasoning of the argument in the advertisement is flawed because it overlooks the possibility that
(A) the equipment used by Kreemo to blend and package its coffee is no different from that used by most other coffee producers
(B) not all of Kreemo's competitors use Colombian coffee beans in the blends of coffee they sell
(C) Kreemo sells more coffee than does any other company
(D) Kreemo's coffee is the most expensive blended coffee available today
(E) the best unblended coffee is better than the best blended coffee


IMO B: If all coffee people blend in the ratio then Kreemo will not be the only place u get rich coffee rather all have the same thing according to Statement B negation

OA once we have some explanation

I would say C here, because the argument confuses number with percentage. That is, it says that Kreemo purchases the most Colombian beans, and then assumes, based on that, that Kreemo puts a higher percentage of Colombian beans in its blend than do other coffee companies. If Kreemo does, in fact, sell more coffee than other companies, its increased bean purchase wouldn't necessarily mean that it was putting more Colombian beans in each can; it would just mean that Kreemo is producing more cans.

grockit_andrea wrote:I would say C here, because the argument confuses number with percentage. That is, it says that Kreemo purchases the most Colombian beans, and then assumes, based on that, that Kreemo puts a higher percentage of Colombian beans in its blend than do other coffee companies. If Kreemo does, in fact, sell more coffee than other companies, its increased bean purchase wouldn't necessarily mean that it was putting more Colombian beans in each can; it would just mean that Kreemo is producing more cans.

the reasoning above makes sense, but I'm still confused between A and C.

What if Kreemo purchases more beans, but as the machines which it uses for blending are same as the other manufacturers' , its coffee will be no different from the other blends. Basically, the amount of Colombian thing in Kreemo and the others will be the same because of the same machines.

please correct me if I'm wrong....

harshavardhanc wrote:
the reasoning above makes sense, but I'm still confused between A and C.

What if Kreemo purchases more beans, but as the machines which it uses for blending are same as the other manufacturers' , its coffee will be no different from the other blends. Basically, the amount of Colombian thing in Kreemo and the others will be the same because of the same machines.

please correct me if I'm wrong....

Does the use of same equipments mean that inputs are also same ? Even after using same equipment Kreemo may put more beans than others do.

Phirozz wrote:

harshavardhanc wrote:
the reasoning above makes sense, but I'm still confused between A and C.

What if Kreemo purchases more beans, but as the machines which it uses for blending are same as the other manufacturers' , its coffee will be no different from the other blends. Basically, the amount of Colombian thing in Kreemo and the others will be the same because of the same machines.

please correct me if I'm wrong....

Does the use of same equipments mean that inputs are also same ? Even after using same equipment Kreemo may put more beans than others do.

And also Kreemo may put less beans than other do.

Option A - leads to YES/NO state.

Same is with option C.

Kreemo sells more coffee, so it MAY or MAY NOT using more beans than other do.

So, IMO, this question is poorly constructed with ambiguous choices.

What is the source of the question?

What does equipments has to do with the Stem. They may use different one but the blend may be still the same.
I may use a mechanical grinder and Keemo can use Electrical one.
But we both mix the same amount

the reasoning above makes sense, but I'm still confused between A and C.

If it had used some word other than "different", choice A may have been the correct answer to a strengthen or weaken question. For example, if choice A had told us that the equipment is of poorer quality, then it would have definitely weakened the argument.

But, in flaw questions, we need to identify the prominent reasoning error of which the arguer is guilty. And, as Andrea points out, the argument's reasoning is definitely guilty of confusing number with percent. The author clealry overlooks the possibility that if Kreemo sells a whole bunch of coffee (way more than the other companies, say), then there might not be a lot of Columbian beans in them.

Flaw questions are not nearly as common as weaken questions. But a common trap is to mix up the analysis of the two. A weaken question asks us to find something which, if true, would weaken the argument; the task is to select from new information. On the other hand, a flaw question is asking for what's already wrong with the argument.