Critical Reasoning

Airline: Newly developed collision-avoidance systems, although not fully tested to discover potential malfunctions, must be installed immediately in passenger planes. Their mechanical warnings enable pilots to avoid crashes.

Pilots: Pilots will not fly in planes with collision-avoidance systems that are not fully tested.Malfunctioning systems could mislead pilots, causing crashes.

The pilots' objection is most strengthened if which of the following is true?

(A) It is always possible for mechanical devices to malfunction.

(B) Jet engines, although not fully tested when first put into use, have achieved exemplary performance and safety records.

(C) Although collision-avoidance systems will enable pilots to avoid some crashes, the likely malfunctions of the not-fully-tested systems will cause even more crashes.

(D) Many airline collisions are caused in part by the exhaustion of overworked pilots.

(E) Collision-avoidance systems, at this stage of development, appear to have worked better in passenger planes than in cargo planes during experimental flights made over a six-month period.


OA is C, i have no issue with the OA, however, can anyone answer how to drop Op A

Answer C?

Argument is about collision avoidance system and hence C is correct option.

A talks about mechanical malfunctions which can occur without collision avoidance system as well.

A is more generic, while C is more specific to the argument.
IMO:C

Whenever we see 'absolute' words like 'Always',as in option A, we need to identify the scope of the premise and conclusion. I this case, saying Mechanical devices always fail is way out of scope and there is nothing in the premise or conclusion that indicates this.

Even if A were true, I dont see how it would strengthen the Pilots conclusion. If anything it looks to be weakening the conclusion.

IMO: C.

What is the OA?

Thanks.