Critical Reasoning

Because of a recent drought in Florida during the orange-growing season, the
price of oranges this season will be three times the usual price. This will drive up
the cost of producing orange juice and thus push up the price of orange juice for
the consumer.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?
(A) The recent drought was not as severe as scientists predicted.
(B) States other than Florida also supply oranges to orange juice manufacturers.
(C) Other ingredients are used in the production of orange juice.
(D) Last year the price of oranges was actually lower than the average price over
the past ten years.
(E) The price of oranges will eventually be $0.48 per crate.

Why not D correct answer ?

We're looking for a choice that will weaken a prediction about this season. D gives evidence about last year, which is irrelevant to an argument about the current year.

IMO B.
Since states other than Florida can also supply oranges ,so the prices of juices can remain stable.

grockit_andrea wrote:We're looking for a choice that will weaken a prediction about this season. D gives evidence about last year, which is irrelevant to an argument about the current year.

Andrea,
When i was paraphrasing the argument, I had a thought something like this:

F: Artificial flavours can alone give the same effect as that of oranges that are used to make orange juices.

Will this one can be used as a weakener instead of B???

poohv005 wrote:Because of a recent drought in Florida during the orange-growing season, the
price of oranges this season will be three times the usual price. This will drive up
the cost of producing orange juice and thus push up the price of orange juice for
the consumer.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?
(A) The recent drought was not as severe as scientists predicted.
(B) States other than Florida also supply oranges to orange juice manufacturers.
(C) Other ingredients are used in the production of orange juice.
(D) Last year the price of oranges was actually lower than the average price over
the past ten years.
(E) The price of oranges will eventually be $0.48 per crate.

Why not D correct answer ?

This is a causal argument that we need to weaken .

Cause : Drought in Florida ----------------> Effect : Increase in price of orange juice.

Premise : drought in Florida during the orange-growing season.

Sub- conclusion : the price of oranges this season will be three times the usual price .

Premise : This will drive up the cost of producing orange juice .

Conclusion : thus push up the price of orange juice for the consumer.

We need to find an answer that will weaken the conclusion. Lets look at answer choices .

(A) The recent drought was not as severe as scientists predicted.
[Although this option discusses drought , it dose not effect the conclusion , eliminate]
(B) States other than Florida also supply oranges to orange juice manufacturers.
[This option shows that the Cause may exist but the Effect may not occur and thus directly weakens the argument, correct]
(C) Other ingredients are used in the production of orange juice.
[This idea is too broad to be considered but can provide an alternate to the conclusion . Showing that orange is not the only ingredient in the orange juice and thus price of orange juice may not depend solely on price of orange . This option too weakens the argument . ]
(D) Last year the price of oranges was actually lower than the average price over the past ten years.
[This option dose not effect the argument. As we are not sure if Florida was drought hit last year and what effect it had on orange prices.]
(E) The price of oranges will eventually be $0.48 per crate.
[What the price of orange will be dose not effect the argument .]

So to summarize B and C both weaken the argument . But not sure which one is correct , if I had to pick one that would be B.

B is correct.

Lets say Florida contributes 10 % to the industry. So, this year, we will be missing up this 10%. But, what if other states have produced double oranges this year - there is no drought in those states. This, in fact, might lower the juice price.

Which is the OA? Both B & C seem to weaken the argument. Which is more appropriate and why?

I pick 'C'.

I found the same question with OA through a search, but answer choice is a little bit different.

https://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/cr- ... t6649.html

A. The recent drought was not as severe as scientists had predicted.
B. Only a small percentage of the oranges used to make orange juice are grown in Florida.
C. Other ingredients are used in the production of orange juice.
D. Last year the price of oranges was actually lower than the average price over the past ten years.
E. The price of oranges will eventually be $0.48 per crate.

OA B

The answer is super clear.

@poohv005: Where is the source of your question? Is it the same as the one I post?

maihan wrote:I found the same question with OA through a search, but answer choice is a little bit different.

https://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/cr- ... t6649.html

A. The recent drought was not as severe as scientists had predicted.
B. Only a small percentage of the oranges used to make orange juice are grown in Florida.
C. Other ingredients are used in the production of orange juice.
D. Last year the price of oranges was actually lower than the average price over the past ten years.
E. The price of oranges will eventually be $0.48 per crate.

OA B

The answer is super clear.

@poohv005: Where is the source of your question? Is it the same as the one I post?

So,far the question posted in this thread,what is the correct answer? Is it 'B' or 'C'? I go for 'C'.

I agree with you guys. I also think that the right answer is B