BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
GMATBootcamp Starts Sep 28
Chris Peckover, Target Test Prep GMAT expert
LIVE ONLINE BOOTCAMP

Live Online Bootcamp Class with Top GMAT Expert Chris Peckover

15 live classes from Sep 28, 2026

Schedule
Mon to Fri · 7:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
Live classes + 6 months of TTP OnDemand
  • Boost your GMAT score in less than one month in a live online class
  • 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included
View bootcamp & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Critical Reasoning

Expert replies
by gunjan1208 » Tue Oct 04, 2011 5:31 am
Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and passengers to wear seat belts argue that in a free
society people have the right to take risks as long as the people do not harm other as a result of taking the risks.
As a result, they conclude that it should be each person's decision whether or not to wear a seat belt.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?
A. Many new cars are built with seat belts that automatically fasten when someone sits in the front seat.
B. Automobile insurance rates for all automobile owners are higher because of the need to pay for the
increased injuries or deaths of people not wearing seat belts.
C. Passengers in airplanes are required to wear seat belts during takeoffs and landings.
D. The rate of automobile fatalities in states that do not have mandatory seat belt laws is greater than the rate
of fatalities in states that do have such laws.
E. In automobile accidents, a greater number of passengers who do not wear seat belts are injured than are
passengers who do wear seat belts.

Source: OG10
OA: B

My question is why not E
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by DevitaN » Tue Oct 04, 2011 6:21 am
Your goal here is to weaken the argument that not wearing seat belts harms ONLY those who make the choice not to wear seat belts. When I started reading the choices, I immediately sought out an answer choice that showed that not wearing seat belts causes harm to others.

Now, I was looking for something about safety and/or bodily harm to others or the likes, but essentially harm can mean any negative effect. Because those people who choose not to wear seat belts are hurting ALL automobile drivers through higher insurance payments, this answer choice is correct. This is the only answer choice that shows how people not wearing their seat belts are causing an adverse effect on others who DO wear their seat belts, even though it's only in the capacity of higher insurance and not something more drastic and life-threatening. I think that's what makes this passage a bit tricky. You think this answer choice is out of scope, but it's not.

Your answer is incorrect because regardless of if the passenger does or does not wear a seat belt, he or she is not having any affect on others. Now, if this answer choice read something like: "Passengers who do not wear their seat belts are more likely to distract the driver, who may or may not be wearing a seatbelt, and thus lead to an increased likelyhood of accidents." This would be a way to show that people not wearing a seat belt aren't only putting themselves at risks, but they are are putting others, who may or may not choose to wear a seat belt, at risk too.
Join the discussion

by 1947 » Tue Oct 04, 2011 6:28 am
gunjan1208 wrote:Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and passengers to wear seat belts argue that in a free
society people have the right to take risks as long as the people do not harm other as a result of taking the risks.
As a result, they conclude that it should be each person's decision whether or not to wear a seat belt.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?
A. Many new cars are built with seat belts that automatically fasten when someone sits in the front seat.
B. Automobile insurance rates for all automobile owners are higher because of the need to pay for the
increased injuries or deaths of people not wearing seat belts.
C. Passengers in airplanes are required to wear seat belts during takeoffs and landings.
D. The rate of automobile fatalities in states that do not have mandatory seat belt laws is greater than the rate
of fatalities in states that do have such laws.
E. In automobile accidents, a greater number of passengers who do not wear seat belts are injured than are
passengers who do wear seat belts.

Source: OG10
OA: B

My question is why not E
Conclusion is "it should be each person's decision whether or not to wear a seat belt." Meaning wearing or not wearing seat belt should not cause problems to others.
To weaken this conclusion we need to find an option where in not wearing seat belt should cause problem to those who wear the seat belt.
Which is what is happening in B.
Hope this explains.
If my post helped you- let me know by pushing the thanks button. Thanks
Join the discussion