Critical Reasoning

Mayor: Downtown Rosco Lake is generally a clean area, but the Monday after the Fourth of July weekend, there was twice as much trash in the streets and parks as usual. Since downtown Rosco Lake is a major tourist destination on weekends, it must be the tourists who are littering.

The mayor's argument is most called into question by which of the following, if true?

A) Usually community volunteers go through downtown on Monday mornings, picking up litter.

B) There is a correlation between tourist traffic and incidents of vandalism in many towns.

C) During the other weekends in July, there were no unusual amounts of litter.

D) The North Shore lakefront area in Rosco Lake is rarely visited by tourists, and has almost no litter, compared to the South Shore, which is a touristy area, and has lots of rubbish lying around.

E) The nearby town of Graylord was able to control its litter problem by instituting large fines that could be levied against litterers.


Source : Grockit.

newton9 wrote:Mayor: Downtown Rosco Lake is generally a clean area, but the Monday after the Fourth of July weekend, there was twice as much trash in the streets and parks as usual. Since downtown Rosco Lake is a major tourist destination on weekends, it must be the tourists who are littering.

The mayor's argument is most called into question by which of the following, if true?

A) Usually community volunteers go through downtown on Monday mornings, picking up litter.

B) There is a correlation between tourist traffic and incidents of vandalism in many towns.

C) During the other weekends in July, there were no unusual amounts of litter.

D) The North Shore lakefront area in Rosco Lake is rarely visited by tourists, and has almost no litter, compared to the South Shore, which is a touristy area, and has lots of rubbish lying around.

E) The nearby town of Graylord was able to control its litter problem by instituting large fines that could be levied against litterers.


Source : Grockit.

IMO C. It questions the conclusion by saying if tourists are littering then why only on one weekend why not on other weekends...

conclusion: tourists are littering the place on the weekend after the 4th of july.[note: this is a causual conclusion: tourists during weekends -> litter the place]

Premise: The place attracts tourists during weekends.

A) Usually community volunteers go through downtown on Monday mornings, picking up litter.[ this is totally out of scope. we are bothered about our conclusion and not how the litter is removed. Eliminated!]

B) There is a correlation between tourist traffic and incidents of vandalism in many towns. [ stimulus talks about only tourists and litter. vandalism does not find a place in it. Eliminated!]

C) During the other weekends in July, there were no unusual amounts of litter.[Bingo! if there were tourists on other weekends then why was the place littered only after the fourth of july? There must be some reason. this is an example of causual reasoning where the cause occurs but effect does not occur. One of the prime ways to weakon a causual conclusion.]

D) The North Shore lakefront area in Rosco Lake is rarely visited by tourists, and has almost no litter, compared to the South Shore, which is a touristy area, and has lots of rubbish lying around.[we are not bothered about other lakes. we are bothered only about downtown lake. Eliminated!]

E) The nearby town of Graylord was able to control its litter problem by instituting large fines that could be levied against litterers. [ this is again totally out of scope. this talks about some other town. not necessary what works there must work here and this does not address the presence of tourists too. Eliminated!]

Hope this helps!

Yes, the correct answer here is C, because the evidence states that downtown Rosco Lake is a tourist destination on weekends in general, but the conclusion is only addressing one specific weekend. Choice C points out that the causal connection isn't a strong one, because the same result hasn't occurred from the same situation on other weekends. Incidentally, D would be a good choice if this question was asking for a strengthener, since it helps to increase the correlation between tourists and litter. It's common for strengthen/weaken questions to have a wrong answer choice that does the opposite of what it's intended to do, so watch out for that trap!

C would be correct if we assume that 'Downtown Rosco Lake' is an area within 'Rosco Lake'.[Similar to what option D suggests]. But the passage does not suggest this. So,how can 'C' be correct? Please clarify.

Cheers,
Paddle Sweep

Recieved a pm.
Hey why do u have to consider where this place lies. For easy analysis, just replace Downtown Rosco lake with some place say X.
The stimulus says that on a particular weekend thr is a lot of litter in X. But it also says that tourists influx to X is greater during weekends.
So the natural question should be why isnt it dirty during the other weekends? This is wat is mentioned in C.
D is a strengthener infact. (note: the question asks u to weaken the stimuli and not strengthen) It says some other area- Y has no litter when thr are no tourists but is littered in the presence of them. So it only strengthens the author's statement that tourists cause littering.

Hope this helps!

Thanks fibbonnaci. Your explanation has made the answer clear to me.

Cheers

Just curious... if answer choice C wasn't there, which answer would you guys/girls pick?

Pretty easy for me.Do LSAT CR and GMAT CR will be walk in the park for you. The answer is C.

@surfer123

The conclusion of the argument is : the littering must have been done by tourists

The evidence of which this conclusion is based is :There was twice as much trash as usual on streets on 4th July weekend.
Tourists frequently visit on Weekends.

The weakeners could be

1) The was a local fair that weekend and all residents visited that fair.
2) The tourists are an educated lot and rarely litter on the streets.

In other words(general)-anything else,other than tourists,that could explain the why there was large amount of litter in streets and parks.

rishab1988 wrote:@surfer123

The conclusion of the argument is : the littering must have been done by tourists

The evidence of which this conclusion is based is :There was twice as much trash as usual on streets on 4th July weekend.
Tourists frequently visit on Weekends.

The weakeners could be

1) The was a local fair that weekend and all residents visited that fair.
2) The tourists are an educated lot and rarely litter on the streets.

In other words(general)-anything else,other than tourists,that could explain the why there was large amount of litter in streets and parks.

Thanks for the reply. I understand the answer is C, but I am curious what answer you would choose if C wasn't there.

That is not a productive exercise. All 4 wrong answers are flawed, and you are better off reflecting on why each is wrong

kevincanspain wrote:That is not a productive exercise. All 4 wrong answers are flawed, and you are better off reflecting on why each is wrong

got it. I was just curious if A could be a possible answer because the volunteers didn't pick up litter the previous Monday, so that is the reason for double the litter.

fibbonnaci wrote:Recieved a pm.
Hey why do u have to consider where this place lies. For easy analysis, just replace Downtown Rosco lake with some place say X.
The stimulus says that on a particular weekend thr is a lot of litter in X. But it also says that tourists influx to X is greater during weekends.
So the natural question should be why isnt it dirty during the other weekends? This is wat is mentioned in C.
D is a strengthener infact. (note: the question asks u to weaken the stimuli and not strengthen) It says some other area- Y has no litter when thr are no tourists but is littered in the presence of them. So it only strengthens the author's statement that tourists cause littering.

Hope this helps!

Hi...
even i was stuck with the same doubt abt the pljace that they were talking to in the option C..(if u reject B as Vandalism is not mentioned anywhere in the passage , in option B the author talks abt other towns ' and that how can vandalism increase littering..(assumption) ) , the same pattern may be followd for option C as they did not talk abt the same town as in the argument...
plz comment

surfer123 wrote:

kevincanspain wrote:That is not a productive exercise. All 4 wrong answers are flawed, and you are better off reflecting on why each is wrong

got it. I was just curious if A could be a possible answer because the volunteers didn't pick up litter the previous Monday, so that is the reason for double the litter.

Agree with you. I firstly chose the A. it convinced me somehow.