Critical Reasoning

The earth's resources are being depleted much too fast. To correct this, the United States must keep its resource consumption at present levels for many years to come.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument above?
(A) New resource deposits are constantly being discovered.
(B) The United States consumes one-third of all resources used in the world.
(C) Other countries need economic development more than the United States does.
(D) Other countries have agreed to hold their resource consumption at present levels.
(E) The United States has been conserving resources for several years.

Please explain your line of reasoning.

OA is B .. but I really dont get it, to me other options sounds better. Please help.

mmon wrote:The earth's resources are being depleted much too fast. To correct this, the United States must keep its resource consumption at present levels for many years to come.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument above?
(A) New resource deposits are constantly being discovered.
(B) The United States consumes one-third of all resources used in the world.
(C) Other countries need economic development more than the United States does.
(D) Other countries have agreed to hold their resource consumption at present levels.
(E) The United States has been conserving resources for several years.

Please explain your line of reasoning.

OA is B .. but I really dont get it, to me other options sounds better. Please help.

source ?!

mmon wrote:The earth's resources are being depleted much too fast. To correct this, the United States must keep its resource consumption at present levels for many years to come.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument above?
(A) New resource deposits are constantly being discovered.
(B) The United States consumes one-third of all resources used in the world.
(C) Other countries need economic development more than the United States does.
(D) Other countries have agreed to hold their resource consumption at present levels.
(E) The United States has been conserving resources for several years.

Please explain your line of reasoning.

OA is B .. but I really dont get it, to me other options sounds better. Please help.

Kaplan Method, step 1: Identify the question stem. Here, we have a straightforward 'Strengthen' prompt. That tells us that when we read the stimulus, we need to look for the author's evidence and conclusion, find any assumptions he is making, and then find the answer that best supports or reaffirms one of his core assumptions. Now that we know what to look for, on to step 2.

Kaplan Method, Step 2: untangle the stimulus. We need to first identify the author's conclusion; what's his main point? In this case, it's clearly what the US must do. Why does he think that? Because the earth is in trouble--that's his evidence.

Kaplan Method, Step 3: solve strategically. This is a classic argument set up. The author is making what is known as a Scope Shift. Take a look at the words I've bolded in the original prompt; his evidence is about the earth, but his conclusion is about something completely different: the United States! So our assumption must bridge that gap. In this case, the author's assumption is that the US is a major part of the earth's depletion of resources.

Once we have out assumption, we make a prediction about the answer. The correct answer to a strengthen question will reaffirm the assumption we've identified. So which answer makes it more likely that the US is a major contributor to the world's depletion of resources? (B) matches that prediction perfectly, and is our correct answer.

Hi Eli,

Why can't we have (D) as an answer choice?
We know that Earth's resources are being depleted. The scope shift is from Earth => United States.
so, it must be Earth => United States + Other countries. To avoid depletion of resources, one soln given is to keep cons at present levels. "To correct this, the United States must keep its resource consumption at present levels for many years to come. " THis sentence will be effective if (D) is also correct. Hence, (D).
As for (B), United states coonsumes 1/3rd of all resources. Hpw do we know that some other country "X" alone doesnot consume more than 1/3rd of the resources and hence is more liable?

Hi AIM_IIM,

D) is wrong for two reasons.

First, D) still doesn't tell us if the US matters. If the US is a third of consumption, as B) tells us, then even if the rest of the world shapes up, we're still in trouble if the US remains wasteful. On the other hand, if the US is perhaps 1% of consumption, and B) is false, then D) would tell us the US doesn't need to shape up since the rest of the world has already fixed the problem. In other words, D) could be either a strengthener or a weakener; it isn't useful

Second, pay close attention to the language in D). Other countries have 'agreed' to hold their resource consumption. What's that worth? We have no evidence from D) that they intend to give their agreement anything but lip-service. Furthermore, even if we take them at their word, D) doesn't tell us the agreement will hold for 'many years to come' as the prompt requires.

Hope this helps!

Eli

As Eli points out, if anything, choice D tends to weaken the argument: if other countries have already agreed to maintain their consumption at current levels, then it suggests that the US may not have to correct its own consumption.

In strengthen questions, many wrong answers are weakeners, and vice-verse.

Reviving an old question...

The earth's resources are being depleted much too fast. To correct this, the United States must keep its resource consumption at present levels for many years to come.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument above?

(A) New resource deposits are constantly being discovered.

(B) The United States consumes one-third of all resources used in the world.

(C) Other countries need economic development more than the United States does.

(D) Other countries have agreed to hold their resource consumption at present levels.

(E) The United States has been conserving resources for several years

Dear Testluv.

I am not convinced that B is the answer.

IMHO, Knowing that the US consumes 1/3 of the earth's resources does not, in anyway, strengthen the conclusion: "To correct resource depletion, the United States must keep its resource consumption at present levels for many years to come"

for e.g let US consume 33kgs (let's call this "x") and let the rest of the world consume 67 kgs (let's call this "y")...US consumes 1/3rd.....Currently x+y = 100... OUR AIM is to reduce 100

To achieve this one of the following must happen

1. x is reduced and y is reduced (for e.g. x= 30, y= 60) x+y = 90

2. x is the same and y is reduced (for e.g. x= 33, y= 60), x+y = 93

3. x is increased and y is reduced (for e.g. x= 35, y= 63), x+y = 98

4. x is reduced and y is increased (for e.g. x = 30, y = 67), x+y = 97

Now what if

5. x remains the same and y goes up (fr e.g. x = 33, y = 70), x+y = 103....

These emboldened scenarios clearly explain why this is a data sufficiency Q and knowing one variable (big or small) is simply not enough and hence option B is insufficient to strengthen the conclusion

I understand why D is wrong because if y (rest of the world) remains the same, then to avoid depletion it is not enough that US maintain its level.... US must decrease its consumption

In sum, none of the options seem right. Can we classify this as a substandard question and not expect it on the GMAT???

Other countries have 'agreed' to hold their resource consumption. What's that worth? We have no evidence from D) that they intend to give their agreement anything but lip-service

I think on the GMAT lip-service is a fair estimate of actual action. Can't we take it as true???? have never heard such an explanation... kindly help

Guys, What is the correct answer? I am not sure if 'B' is the correct one.

I was tempted by 'D' first but having through the explanations above it is quite clear that 'D' cannot be the answer. However is 'B' the correct? Not able to understand as to how it can be correct.

Cheers

What if the US consumed only 1/10000 of all the resources in the world? Then, it casts doubt on the idea that the US would have to maintain its consumption levels in order to keep the Earth's resources from being depleted quickly--because it accounts for such a small fraction anyways.

But if the US consumes a significant fraction of all of the world's resources, then it becomes more important for the US to maintain (or reduce) its consumption levels--it becomes more important that the US not increase its consumption levels.

...and because there are far more than three countries in the world, in choice B, we should read "1/3" as "significant fraction".

Testluv wrote:What if the US consumed only 1/10000 of all the resources in the world? Then, it casts doubt on the idea that the US would have to maintain its consumption levels in order to keep the Earth's resources from being depleted quickly--because it accounts for such a small fraction anyways.

But if the US consumes a significant fraction of all of the world's resources, then it becomes more important for the US to maintain (or reduce) its consumption levels--it becomes more important that the US not increase its consumption levels.

...and because there are far more than three countries in the world, in choice B, we should read "1/3" as "significant fraction".

Hi Testluv,

It looks like we need to bring 'outside knowledge' to solve this question. Is there a way to solve this question without bringing 'outside knowledge'?

Cheers

We are allowed to bring in the most basic commonsense facts. For example, we are allowed to assume the directionality of "clockwise". We are allowed and expected to know that red is a different color from green. Because the stimulus brings up the US, we are allowed and expected to know that there are many countries in the world other than the US.

But if the passage says Bertrand oligopolies are great and you remember your Economics professor denouncing Bertrand oligopolies, then you can't bring in that outside subject-matter knowledge.

The stimulus says that the present situation : earth's resources are being depleted much too fast.

Now, it further talks about the "correction", which in my opinion can be :

the resources are not depleted at all

OR


the rate of resource depletion is reduced.


Maintaining a status-quo cannot be a possible correction.

So, even if we include B in the set of premises, there is still some information lacking to strengthen the conclusion that a betterment will happen.

harshavardhanc wrote:The stimulus says that the present situation : earth's resources are being depleted much too fast.

Now, it further talks about the "correction", which in my opinion can be :

the resources are not depleted at all

OR


the rate of resource depletion is reduced.


Maintaining a status-quo cannot be a possible correction.

So, even if we include B in the set of premises, there is still some information lacking to strengthen the conclusion that a betterment will happen.

He is arguing that stabilization is necessary (notice the word "must"); he never argued that it would be sufficent. I guess the author is a realist, athough he would surely be overjoyed if the US actually managed to decrease its consumption.

@viidyasagar

Initially even I thought that D makes more sense. However after reading experts' reply, I learnt B would be better.

Here is my 2 cents:
Attack this question as you would do Data sufficiency question.
Read option B, it sounds good, lets keep that aside for now.
Read option D (without the idea that US consumes1/3 of resources, forget about this for now)

Now, read the stimulus,
1.Resources are being depleted very quickly
2.US has to maintain its usage.
D=> All other countries agreed to maintain.
This is all you have now. Does it make any sense as an argument. Definitely Not. To make this complete you need B. But that's not the CR works !

Now, read the stimulus,
1.Resources are being deplted very quickly
2.US has to maintain its usage.
B=>US is the single entity which consumes 1/3 of resources. If you introduce B between 1 and 2, the argument completely makes sense. Bingo!

A point to note here is, this question has been designed cleverly. Say if B and D are interchanged in the question, no way you would choose D (that is the new B lol).
It's like the concept of TV, your brain retains information for certain period of time inadventarily which tempts you to choose D.

@ gtvisa2002...lol @ brainwashing...

I AGREE that B is better than D....but B alone is insufficient, that's all....

Even if the US is a significant consumer, both the US and the rest of the world MUST complement each other to reduce overall consumption... basically B+D is my answer....In Data Sufficiency language C

Testluv....For CR, i read only ur posts...U are GOD...and i am.. as big a devotee of urs as gmatmachoman.....Is this a GMAT Question??? if yes, then at what approximate level (above 600, 700, etc)