Critical Reasoning

Few businesses will voluntarily implement environmental rotection measures that benefit the public if those measures reduce profitability. Even though such measures may cost less to implement than the total value of their benefits to society, the company making the decision bears all of the cost and receives little, if any, of the benefit. For example, XYZ Corporation has for the last 10 years refused to install smokestack filters to reduce the air pollution emitted by its factory, claiming that the cost would be prohibitive. Therefore, if such measures are to be implemented to protect the environment, they must be initiated by government regulation or intervention.
The bolded portions of the argument above perform which of the following functions?

1. The first phrase states the conclusion, and the second provides evidence, the truth of which supports the validity of the conclusion
2. The first phrase states a premise supporting the conclusion, and the second provides evidence, the falsity of which would disprove the first phrase.
3. The first phrase describes a general principle, and the second provides evidence countering that principle.
4. The first phrase states a claim supporting the conclusion, but for which no evidence is given, and the second describes an example supporting the conclusion.
5. The first phrase states a generalization supporting the conclusion, and the second cites an example supporting that generalization.


OA [E What is wrong with D?[/spoiler]

the second statement is an example given for businesses that do not implement protection measures in case these measures do not yeild profits.
But in D- The first phrase states a claim supporting the conclusion, but for which no evidence is given, and the second describes an example supporting the conclusion.

the statement that i have highlighted is wrong. coz the second bold face statement gives evidence/example for the first bold face statement. Hence D is wrong.

E correctly brings out the relation between the bold face statements stating that the first bold face statement is a generalization and the second bold face statement is an example supporting that statement.

Hope this helps!

Why is B wrong?

max37274 wrote:Why is B wrong?

2. The first phrase states a premise supporting the conclusion, and the second provides evidence, the falsity of which would disprove the first phrase.
If second BF is proved FALSE, would it affect BF 1 in any way? would it disprove BF 1? No !! Because BF 2 is only an example given to support BF 1. But if proven false, BF1 will certainly not DISPROVE BF 1.

I would go for D.
E is looking wrong. Here second is not supporting to first.

I think D is definitely wrong as evidence is clearly provided. I was weary of E because it doesn't sound right, generalization? example? Evidence, premise, conclusion are the words we use for CR! So I ignored E for now and worked through A-D by elimination:

1) The first phrase is NOT the conclusion...next
2) It sounds good until you hit the last part "..., the falsity of which would disprove the first phrase". Well no it would not because XYZ Corporation does not represent all businesses, it is only one of the "few" businesses. It is an example/evidence.
3) False, the second provides evident, does not counter it
4) False again, evidence is given

.... OK so only (5) is left. Reading it again carefully it makes sense. I may not like to think that the first phrase is a 'generalization' but i'll go with that...and oh...it supports the conclusion...yes, yes it does!! The second phrase I like to think of evidence but in this case example/evidence, same thing.

Even by elimination you can see that E is the answer that best fits!