Critical Reasoning

It is better for the environment if as much of all packaging as possible is made from materials that are biodegradable in landfills. Therefore, it is always a change for the worse to replace packaging made from paper or cardboard with packaging made from plastics that are not biodegradable in landfills.
Which of the following, if true, constitutes the strongest objection to the argument above?
(A) The paper and cardboard used in packaging are usually not biodegradable in landfills.
(B) Some plastic used in packaging is biodegradable in landfills.
(C) In many landfills, a significant proportion of space is taken up by materials other than discarded packaging materials.
(D) It is impossible to avoid entirely the use of packaging materials that are not biodegradable in landfills.
(E) Sometimes, in packaging an item, plastics that are not biodegradable in landfills are combined with cardboard.
[spoiler]The argument says the change is always worse-- to object this we need to show "no its not always worse rather sometimes it is ok-- for this if we say that sme plastics are biodegradable and therefore using them is some times is good . But as per the OA I am wrng in my reasoning pls help[/spoiler]

source : LSAT

It is better for the environment if as much of all packaging as possible is made from materials that are biodegradable in landfills. Therefore, it is always a change for the worse to replace packaging made from paper or cardboard with packaging made from plastics that are not biodegradable in landfills.

Which of the following, if true, constitutes the strongest objection to the argument above?

The author's conclusion :
Packaging made from biodegradable materials (paper or cardboard) = better
Packaging made from plastics that are not biodegradable in landfills = worse

We can weaken the argument if we can show either one of the above or both are not true. Lets see which one does that for us :

(A) The paper and cardboard used in packaging are usually not biodegradable in landfills.
Correct : If paper and cardboard are not BIODEGRADABLE then they are not better. This statement undermines the author's conclusion significantly.

(B) Some plastic used in packaging is biodegradable in landfills.
Incorrect : Does nothing to undermine the conclusion.

(C) In many landfills, a significant proportion of space is taken up by materials other than discarded packaging materials.
Incorrect : SPACE in landfills is not an issue here. Eliminated.

(D) It is impossible to avoid entirely the use of packaging materials that are not biodegradable in landfills.
Incorrect : IMPOSSIBLE is an extreme word here. Eliminated.

(E) Sometimes, in packaging an item, plastics that are not biodegradable in landfills are combined with cardboard.
Incorrect : PLASTIC is PLASTIC... whether adulterated or not .... it is still not BIODEGRADABLE.
_________________

gmatnmein2010 wrote:It is better for the environment if as much of all packaging as possible is made from materials that are biodegradable in landfills. Therefore, it is always a change for the worse to replace packaging made from paper or cardboard with packaging made from plastics that are not biodegradable in landfills.
Which of the following, if true, constitutes the strongest objection to the argument above?
(A) The paper and cardboard used in packaging are usually not biodegradable in landfills.
(B) Some plastic used in packaging is biodegradable in landfills.
(C) In many landfills, a significant proportion of space is taken up by materials other than discarded packaging materials.
(D) It is impossible to avoid entirely the use of packaging materials that are not biodegradable in landfills.
(E) Sometimes, in packaging an item, plastics that are not biodegradable in landfills are combined with cardboard.
[spoiler]The argument says the change is always worse-- to object this we need to show "no its not always worse rather sometimes it is ok-- for this if we say that sme plastics are biodegradable and therefore using them is some times is good . But as per the OA I am wrng in my reasoning pls help[/spoiler]

source : LSAT

IMO A
here the author is assuming that packaging made from paper or cardboard is a biodegradable in landfills
to object it A tells straight away that its not biodegradable in landfills.

however the word SOME is making it a weak contender for correct ans over A

thephoenix wrote: IMO A
here the author is assuming that packaging made from paper or cardboard is a biodegradable in landfills
to object it A tells straight away that its not biodegradable in landfills.

however the word SOME is making it a weak contender for correct ans over A

@thephoenix
can u elaborate this part

I choose A too.

(A) The paper and cardboard used in packaging are usually not biodegradable in landfills.
-- usually not biodegradable is better contender

(B) Some plastic used in packaging is biodegradable in landfills.
-- Some, if we change the wording from some to most, then it wud also become strong contender.

P1. better for environment if as much as packaging is done in materials bio-degradable in land-fills.
Conclusion- Therefore, packaging in plastics replacing packaging in paper or cardboard is always a change for worse.

Now the premise should be leading to the conclusion, so in effect, the argument is that 'because bio-degradable in landfills are better, the change is always worse'.

The assumption is that paper and cardboard are bio-degradable in landfills.

And we are looking for the strongest objection, so if we have a look at A and B, A would be a strong objection because of the word usually. And if we observe, the stimulus clearly mentions that we are talking only about non-biodegradable plastics (Essential modifier "that" ).so Eliminate B.

My pic is A

(A) Correct. If paper and cardboard are not biodegradable then they are not better. This statement undermines the author's conclusion significantly.
(B) Does nothing to undermine the conclusion.
(C) Space in landfills is not an issue here. Eliminated.
(D) Impossible is an extreme word here. Eliminated.
(E) Plastic, whether adulterated or not, it is still not biodegradable