The current proposal to give college students a broader choice in planning their own courses of study should be abandoned. The students who are supporting the proposal will never be satisfied, no matter what requirements are established. Some of these students have reached their third year without declaring a major. One first-year student has failed to complete four required courses. Several others have indicated a serious indifference to grades and intellectual achievement.
A flaw in the argument is that it does which one of the following?

(A) avoids the issue by focusing on supporters of the proposal --> the supporters (students) are part of the issue. No.

(B) argues circularly by assuming the conclusion is true in stating the premises. --> the conclusion is that the proposal should be abandoned and the premises are based on that.

(C) fails to define the critical term "satisfied" --> irrelevant.

(D) distorts the proposal advocated by opponents --> no distortion really.

(E) users the term "student" equivocally. --> irrelevant.

IMO (B). OA?

I am not going to reveal the OA after 1 reply

mundasingh123 wrote:I am not going to reveal the OA after 1 reply

IMO - [spoiler][/spoiler]

Just kidding mundasingh. I would like to know what options u were seriously considering ? For me the answer to this CR clicked me in these lines of the stem :
" Some of these students have reached their third year"

when the author says - these - he is arguing only about a suset of people who are not representative of the effectiveness of the overall impact of the "current proposal" the argument is jargoning about.

So the only contenders are A and B.
B is incorrect as circular reasning in CR terms is the correct answer when the argument presupposes what is seeks to establish. I remember a CR from powerscore exercise in flaw chapter.{u can have a look at Q3 in there- some detective CR which is an excellent example of circular reasoning}

the correct answer is A.

I could eliminate all the options except for A and C and even , then i didnt find either option suitable

mundasingh123 wrote:I could eliminate all the options except for A and C and even , then i didnt find either option suitable

I would kind of agree with you on this one. A did not click to me on first read. I had to re-read and justify A to myself as all other options were worse.

For option C. Flaw answers are usually never hinged on 1 word. Do a set of 5-10 flaw questions{if needed make a word doc of all} and notice the pattern of wrong answer choices. You will get better at this question type.

bblast wrote:

mundasingh123 wrote:I could eliminate all the options except for A and C and even , then i didnt find either option suitable

I would kind of agree with you on this one. A did not click to me on first read. I had to re-read and justify A to myself as all other options were worse.

For option C. Flaw answers are usually never hinged on 1 word. Do a set of 5-10 flaw questions{if needed make a word doc of all} and notice the pattern of wrong answer choices. You will get better at this question type.

What about strengthen and weaken questions ?

Hey,
1>usually finding the assumption in the argument and then prephrasing an answer before reading the options to weaken/strengthen this assumption works in S/W questions.

2>The concept of causality is a must know in how to attack causal arguments involving strengthen/weaken.

But these questions can get outlandishly hard at times
One of the toughest GMAT prep weaken q's i've come across. I have not seen it on prep myself.
{https://www.beatthegmat.com/gmat-prep-qu ... 17435.html}.

bblast wrote:Hey,
1>usually finding the assumption in the argument and then prephrasing an answer before reading the options to weaken/strengthen this assumption works in S/W questions.

2>The concept of causality is a must know in how to attack causal arguments involving strengthen/weaken.

But these questions can get outlandishly hard at times
One of the toughest GMAT prep weaken q's i've come across. I have not seen it on prep myself.
{https://www.beatthegmat.com/gmat-prep-qu ... 17435.html}.

I dont think all strengthen / weaken question involve causality . powerscore does give us a blueprint for attacking causality questions but what about those questions which dont involve causality

You are right, See my point 1 above. The other type of question is usually in which we need to find un underlying assumption and then attack the same. Post a few s/w questions here:
(questions that do not involve causality and questions maybe from Aristotle 101-cause that's the only source I have not used))
and then we can discuss.

bblast wrote:You are right, See my point 1 above. The other type of question is usually in which we need to find un underlying assumption and then attack the same. Post a few s/w questions here:
(questions that do not involve causality and questions maybe from Aristotle 101-cause that's the only source I have not used))
and then we can discuss.

Thats Kewwl

Good Question I was confused between A and B