Critical Reasoning

Hi All,

It is pretty hard to understand this question.

McBride: The proposed new fuel efficiency standards, if implemented, will
discourage the manufacture of full-size cars. This prospect is troubling because
when a subcompact and a full-size car collide, the people in the subcompact
are more likely to be seriously injured than if theirs had also been a full-size car.
The new fuel efficiency standards should therefore be opposed.

Leggett: But whenever any two cars collide, it is more likely that someone
will be seriously injured if one of the cars is a full-size car than if neither of the
cars is full-size. Thus, the new fuel efficiency standards should be supported
precisely because they discourage the manufacture of full-size cars.

McBride's and Leggett's statements commit them to disagreeing about the
truth of which one of the following?

(A) The manufacture of full-size cars should be discouraged.
(B) Fuel conservation is less important than safety in the event of a
collision.
(C) When a full-size car and a subcompact car collide, the occupants of the
full-size car are less likely than the occupants of the subcompact car to
the seriously injured.
(D) Reducing the number of full-size cars on the highway will reduce the
frequency of collisions between automobiles.
(E) The new fuel-efficiency standards will encourage automobile
manufacturers to build more subcompact cars.

OA A

I am not able to understand the Question Stem itself.
Does it say "to which option does both of them disagree ??"

Thanks in advance.

Regards,
Uva.

Uva@90 wrote:Hi All,

It is pretty hard to understand this question.

McBride: The proposed new fuel efficiency standards, if implemented, will
discourage the manufacture of full-size cars. This prospect is troubling because
when a subcompact and a full-size car collide, the people in the subcompact
are more likely to be seriously injured than if theirs had also been a full-size car.
The new fuel efficiency standards should therefore be opposed.

Leggett: But whenever any two cars collide, it is more likely that someone
will be seriously injured if one of the cars is a full-size car than if neither of the
cars is full-size. Thus, the new fuel efficiency standards should be supported
precisely because they discourage the manufacture of full-size cars.

McBride's and Leggett's statements commit them to disagreeing about the
truth of which one of the following?

(A) The manufacture of full-size cars should be discouraged.
(B) Fuel conservation is less important than safety in the event of a
collision.
(C) When a full-size car and a subcompact car collide, the occupants of the
full-size car are less likely than the occupants of the subcompact car to
the seriously injured.
(D) Reducing the number of full-size cars on the highway will reduce the
frequency of collisions between automobiles.
(E) The new fuel-efficiency standards will encourage automobile
manufacturers to build more subcompact cars.

OA A

I am not able to understand the Question Stem itself.
Does it say "to which option does both of them disagree ??"

Thanks in advance.

Regards,
Uva.

Yes, the question is asking which option do they disagree with.

Mcbride: oppose standard because it discourage the manaufacture of fullsize cars.
Leggett: support standard because it discourage the manaufacture of fullsize cars.

Based on these statements, they disagree on whether to discourage the manufacture of fullsize cars.
Therefore answer = A

theCEO wrote:

Uva@90 wrote:Hi All,

It is pretty hard to understand this question.

McBride: The proposed new fuel efficiency standards, if implemented, will
discourage the manufacture of full-size cars. This prospect is troubling because
when a subcompact and a full-size car collide, the people in the subcompact
are more likely to be seriously injured than if theirs had also been a full-size car.
The new fuel efficiency standards should therefore be opposed.

Leggett: But whenever any two cars collide, it is more likely that someone
will be seriously injured if one of the cars is a full-size car than if neither of the
cars is full-size. Thus, the new fuel efficiency standards should be supported
precisely because they discourage the manufacture of full-size cars.

McBride's and Leggett's statements commit them to disagreeing about the
truth of which one of the following?

(A) The manufacture of full-size cars should be discouraged.
(B) Fuel conservation is less important than safety in the event of a
collision.
(C) When a full-size car and a subcompact car collide, the occupants of the
full-size car are less likely than the occupants of the subcompact car to
the seriously injured.
(D) Reducing the number of full-size cars on the highway will reduce the
frequency of collisions between automobiles.
(E) The new fuel-efficiency standards will encourage automobile
manufacturers to build more subcompact cars.

OA A

I am not able to understand the Question Stem itself.
Does it say "to which option does both of them disagree ??"

Thanks in advance.

Regards,
Uva.

Yes, the question is asking which option do they disagree with.

Mcbride: oppose standard because it discourage the manaufacture of fullsize cars.
Leggett: support standard because it discourage the manaufacture of fullsize cars.

Based on these statements, they disagree on whether to discourage the manufacture of fullsize cars.
Therefore answer = A

Hi TheCEO,

Ahh... my bad I thought in other way...

I though to which option they both dont agree(i.e. each separately dont agree with answer option).

Now I got it. One person agree and another person disagree.

Didn't get the question clearly...my bad
It is actually easy question in that case...

Thanks for pointing out it.

Regards,
Uva.

Uva@90 wrote:

theCEO wrote:

Uva@90 wrote:Hi All,

It is pretty hard to understand this question.

McBride: The proposed new fuel efficiency standards, if implemented, will
discourage the manufacture of full-size cars. This prospect is troubling because
when a subcompact and a full-size car collide, the people in the subcompact
are more likely to be seriously injured than if theirs had also been a full-size car.
The new fuel efficiency standards should therefore be opposed.

Leggett: But whenever any two cars collide, it is more likely that someone
will be seriously injured if one of the cars is a full-size car than if neither of the
cars is full-size. Thus, the new fuel efficiency standards should be supported
precisely because they discourage the manufacture of full-size cars.

McBride's and Leggett's statements commit them to disagreeing about the
truth of which one of the following?

(A) The manufacture of full-size cars should be discouraged.
(B) Fuel conservation is less important than safety in the event of a
collision.
(C) When a full-size car and a subcompact car collide, the occupants of the
full-size car are less likely than the occupants of the subcompact car to
the seriously injured.
(D) Reducing the number of full-size cars on the highway will reduce the
frequency of collisions between automobiles.
(E) The new fuel-efficiency standards will encourage automobile
manufacturers to build more subcompact cars.

OA A

I am not able to understand the Question Stem itself.
Does it say "to which option does both of them disagree ??"

Thanks in advance.

Regards,
Uva.

Yes, the question is asking which option do they disagree with.

Mcbride: oppose standard because it discourage the manaufacture of fullsize cars.
Leggett: support standard because it discourage the manaufacture of fullsize cars.

Based on these statements, they disagree on whether to discourage the manufacture of fullsize cars.
Therefore answer = A

Hi TheCEO,

Ahh... my bad I thought in other way...

I though to which option they both dont agree(i.e. each separately dont agree with answer option).

Now I got it. One person agree and another person disagree.

Didn't get the question clearly...my bad
It is actually easy question in that case...

Thanks for pointing out it.

Regards,
Uva.

Hi Uva@90,

The purpose of these questions is to confuse us all . I do see how the question is worded for you to think that it meant "they both don't agree".