Critical Reasoning

One variety of a partially biodegradable plastic beverage container is manufactured from small bits of plastic bound together by a degradable bonding agent such as cornstarch. Since only the bonding agent degrades, leaving the small bits of plastic, no less plastic refuse per container is produced when such containers are discarded than when comparable nonbiodegradable containers are discarded.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument above?

(a) Both partially biodegradable and non-biodegradable plastic beverage containers can be crushed completely flat by refuse compactors
(b) The partially biodegradable plastic beverage containers are made with more plastic than comparable nonbiodegradable ones in order to compensate for the weakening effect of the bonding agents
(c) Many consumers are ecology-minded and prefer to buy a product sold in partially biodegradable plastic beverage containers rather than in nonbiodegradable containers, even if the price is higher.
(d) The manufacturing process for partially biodegradable plastic beverage containers results in less plastic waste than the manufacturing process for non-biodegradable plastic beverage containers
(e) Technological problems with recycling currently prevent the reuse as food or beverage containers of the plastic from either type of plastic beverage container

Answer is b. Don't understand how that strengthens the argument. Explanation.

i will pick B as the answer.

since C, D and E are not having effect on argument or are out of scope.

A is not strengthening as well

B gives support for conclusion that both container will produce same amount of plastic refuse.

Argument : The amount of plastic is not reduced even if the bottles are made of small plastic pieces and are attached with bonding agent.

Weaken : We can weaken this argument by saying that the bonding agent now forms a part of the material which is used to make the bottle. So if 1000 gms of platic is needed to make the bottle , with the bonding agent present , 900 gms will be plastic and 100gms will be bonding agent. So this will produce only 900gms platic . Hence weakened.

But what can happen to this bottle ? It will be weak because the plastic is lesser and the bonding agent is more. To compensate for this more plastic will be used say 1000gms plastic and 100 gms bonding agent. This again contains 1000gms plactic which is non-degradable. Hence the argument is strengthened.

This is what B does.

Hope this helps.

Sorry for reopening this thread! Few days back, i came across this question in OG. Somehow, I'm not able to catch the crux of the argument. Particularly i'm confused by the phrase "no less plastic refuse per container". Can someone explain the argument in detail and the answer choice as well?

papgust wrote:Sorry for reopening this thread! Few days back, i came across this question in OG. Somehow, I'm not able to catch the crux of the argument. Particularly i'm confused by the phrase "no less plastic refuse per container". Can someone explain the argument in detail and the answer choice as well?

the conclusion for above argument is that
plastic refuse/container produced from discarding of container made from bounding small bits of plastic (by biodegradable bonding agent) = plastic refuse produced from nonbiodegradable container....

here the author is assuming that it should be less for former one as it uses less plastic , but it is infact same

hence a correct ans to support the conclusion is one which tells y it is so

B clearly tells that the container produced from samll bits contain more plastic and hence proves the equality

I will Go with option B in this case.

papgust wrote:Sorry for reopening this thread! Few days back, i came across this question in OG. Somehow, I'm not able to catch the crux of the argument. Particularly i'm confused by the phrase "no less plastic refuse per container". Can someone explain the argument in detail and the answer choice as well?

Here goes the explanation,

No less plastic refuse per container is produced when biodegradable containers are discarded than when comparable non-biodegradable containers are discarded.

No less plastic refuse per container can mean - equal or more amounts of plastic refuse per container is produced. This is the main CRUX of this argument. So, B is the correct answer.