Critical Reasoning

Brownlea's post office must be replaced with a larger one. The present one cannot
be expanded. Land near the present location in the center of town is more
expensive than land on the outskirts of town. Since the cost of acquiring a site is a
significant part of the total construction cost, the post office clearly could be built
more cheaply on the outskirts of town.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument's
stated conclusion?

(A) The new post office will have to be built in accordance with a demanding
new citywide building code.

(B) If the new post office is built on the outskirts of town, it will require a parking
lot, but if sited near the present post office it will not.

(C) If the new post office is built on the outskirts of town, current city bus routes
will have to be expanded to provide access.

(D) If the new post office is built on the outskirts of town, residents will make
decreased use of post office boxes, with the result that mail carriers will have
to deliver more mail to homes.

(E) If the new post office is built near the center of town, disruptions to city
traffic would have to be minimized by taking such steps as doing some
construction work in stages at night and on weekends.

Will post OA later after some discussion.. What would you do when you feel that 2 out of 5 options are almost close....How to Pick the correct One...Please advise

ymach3 wrote:Brownlea's post office must be replaced with a larger one. The present one cannot
be expanded. Land near the present location in the center of town is more
expensive than land on the outskirts of town. Since the cost of acquiring a site is a
significant part of the total construction cost, the post office clearly could be built
more cheaply on the outskirts of town.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument's
stated conclusion?

(A) The new post office will have to be built in accordance with a demanding
new citywide building code.

(B) If the new post office is built on the outskirts of town, it will require a parking
lot, but if sited near the present post office it will not.

(C) If the new post office is built on the outskirts of town, current city bus routes
will have to be expanded to provide access.

(D) If the new post office is built on the outskirts of town, residents will make
decreased use of post office boxes, with the result that mail carriers will have
to deliver more mail to homes.

(E) If the new post office is built near the center of town, disruptions to city
traffic would have to be minimized by taking such steps as doing some
construction work in stages at night and on weekends.

Will post OA later after some discussion.. What would you do when you feel that 2 out of 5 options are almost close....How to Pick the correct One...Please advise

What is the source of the q... none of the options sound gr8... I would go with B anyhow... thats the closest...

Break this down first into the important parts

1. Land near the center of town is more expensive than that on the outskirts
2. The cost of acquiring land is a significant part of the construction cost
3. The post office should be built on the outskirts to save those costs

A. Incorrect. Either location would have to be built in accordance with a code so the cost would be the same.

B. Correct. Go back to the original reasoning behind the argument. The cost of acquiring land is the significant cost. If the outskirts require a parking lot it will require more land than the one in the center of town. This added land has a good possibility to raise the cost of building on the outskirts to higher than in the center of town.

C. Incorrect. This may make operational costs for the city higher, but it has nothing to do with the actual construction of the post office.

D. Incorrect. Again operational costs for the PO would be higher, but this has nothing to do with building a new post office.

E. Incorrect. This strengthens the argument as it would add more money to the construction cost in the city compared to outside of the center.

I dont see any better options as well
but even with B

Suppose,as question says if land are really cheap in outshirts
cost of construction of post office + cost of construction of parking<cost of acquiring land in centre


I know all CR doesnt go with real life scenario,but think of some US cities as newyork,the cost of acquiring land only there may be enough for buying land and construction of house and parking in other remote areas....

But i think they say OA is B but i feel it doesnt fully invalidate(weaken) the conclusion

thanks

kapur.arnav wrote:

ymach3 wrote:Brownlea's post office must be replaced with a larger one. The present one cannot
be expanded. Land near the present location in the center of town is more
expensive than land on the outskirts of town. Since the cost of acquiring a site is a
significant part of the total construction cost, the post office clearly could be built
more cheaply on the outskirts of town.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the argument's
stated conclusion?

(A) The new post office will have to be built in accordance with a demanding
new citywide building code.

(B) If the new post office is built on the outskirts of town, it will require a parking
lot, but if sited near the present post office it will not.

(C) If the new post office is built on the outskirts of town, current city bus routes
will have to be expanded to provide access.

(D) If the new post office is built on the outskirts of town, residents will make
decreased use of post office boxes, with the result that mail carriers will have
to deliver more mail to homes.

(E) If the new post office is built near the center of town, disruptions to city
traffic would have to be minimized by taking such steps as doing some
construction work in stages at night and on weekends.

Will post OA later after some discussion.. What would you do when you feel that 2 out of 5 options are almost close....How to Pick the correct One...Please advise

What is the source of the q... none of the options sound gr8... I would go with B anyhow... thats the closest...

Yes, B is the correct answer.

alright,previously I found it difficult to eliminate C and D..When i looked at the Argument again this morning..I am able to mark it right... My thoughts: As the premise says that 'the cost of acquiring a site is a
significant part of the total construction cost' ... this is something related to Land and stuff.... Nothing about Operational cost or post-office users ease to access Post Office is mentioned....C and D become out of scope Optiions... and only B looks close...

Let me know if there is any flaw in my reasoning/thinking/approach....

Source : LSAT CRs

frank1 wrote:I dont see any better options as well
but even with B

Suppose,as question says if land are really cheap in outshirts
cost of construction of post office + cost of construction of parking<cost of acquiring land in centre


I know all CR doesnt go with real life scenario,but think of some US cities as newyork,the cost of acquiring land only there may be enough for buying land and construction of house and parking in other remote areas....

But i think they say OA is B but i feel it doesnt fully invalidate(weaken) the conclusion

thanks

Frank you have to remember that the question is not asking you to invalidate the conclusion. It is asking which one most seriously undermines the conclusion. Basically they just want to know which is the best choice among the 5 and which has the most powerful weakening message, even if you can come up with a number of ways that it does not actually invalidate the conclusion.

fitzgerald23 wrote: Frank you have to remember that the question is not asking you to invalidate the conclusion. It is asking which one most seriously undermines the conclusion. Basically they just want to know which is the best choice among the 5 and which has the most powerful weakening message, even if you can come up with a number of ways that it does not actually invalidate the conclusion.

yup thats right
but i think "how do we weaken things" either attacking the evidence or conclusion....
i have word 'invalidate' there which seems to be quite harsh but i think in general thing is same...

in this case,B i think doesnt weaken the conclusion as i have provided evidence
as
cost of construction post office+parking lot in outside area(where things are cheap as question says)<cost of construction of post office only in central areas

I think D can be contender as IF PEOPLE WILL GIVEUP USING POSTOFFICE WHAT WILL be the use of post office what ever may be the location....
after all people wont drive 10 miles to reach post office and post a letter

thanks
but as i agree all 5 are not good to be good answer