Critical Reasoning

Q. It is possible to prevent murders if the knowledge of state of mind of murderers is known in advance. Looking at the current technology curve, it is predicted that miniature devices that can judge human's state of mind and embedded in the body will be available. Hence, in 20 years, it would be possible to reduce the number of murders considerably by embedding these devices in the mind of suspicious personnel who have a history of crime.

Which of the following, if true, casts most serious doubt on the conclusion made by the argument?

A. Current privacy laws do not permit embedding monitoring devices in humans.
B. It is estimated that these devices will be expensive costing upwards of $5000/piece.
C. It was recently proved that techniques used by mind readers are not repeatable and will not hold their ground in the court of law.
D. People who are arrested when they are about to commit a murder cannot be charged since the murder never happened.
E. Looking at the pace of current technology improvement, it seems highly doubtful that scientists will be able to produce a miniature device smaller than human cells.


Ans - A, Why A is correct, it states that current privacy laws do not permit embedding but does not take into account that in 20 years law can change

It's possible the the rationale of whomever wrote this question is that the other answer choices are either irrelevant or cast even less doubt than A.

All the same I agree with what you are saying and find this question to be VERY weak.