Critical Reasoning

Consumer Health Advocate: Your candy company adds caffeine to your chocolate candy bars so that each one deliver s a specific amount of caffeine Since Caffeine is highly addictive this indicates that you intended to keep your customers addicted

Candy Manufacturer: Our manufacturing process results in there being less caffeine in each candy bar than unprocessed cocoa beans from which chocolate is made.

Q)Candy Manufacturer's response is flawed as refutation of consumer health advocate's argument because it is-----

1) Fails to address the issue of whether the level of caffeine in the candy bars sold by the manufacturer is enough to keep the people addicted

2) Assumes without warrant that all unprocessed cocoa beans contain a uniform amount of caffeine.

3) Does not specify exactly how caffeine is lost in the manufacturing process

4) Treats the advocate's argument as though it were about a single candy bar instead of the whole the chocolates in general.

5) Merely contradicts the advocate's conclusion without giving any reason to believe that advocate reasoning is unsound

IMO - A or 1 as you have shown

HA - you add caffeine to keep customers addicted
CM - there's less caffeine than in the cocoa beans

A - Never addressed the issue of the amount of caffeine to stay addicted - this is my choice

What is the OA?

A is correct

Same reasons as given by jeffedwards.

IMO A