The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is

This topic has expert replies
Moderator
Posts: 7187
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2017 4:43 pm
Followed by:23 members

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

The difficulty with the proposed high-speed train line is that a used plane can be bought for one-third the price of the train line, and the plane, which is just as fast, can fly anywhere. The train would be a fixed linear system, and we live in a world that is spreading out in all directions and in which consumers choose the free-wheel systems (cars, buses, aircraft), which do not have fixed routes. Thus a sufficient market for the train will not exist.

Which of the following, if true, most severely weakens the argument presented above?


(A) Cars, buses, and planes require the efforts of drivers and pilots to guide them, whereas the train will be guided mechanically.

(B) Cars and buses are not nearly as fast as the high-speed train will be.

(C) Planes are not a free-wheel system because they can fly only between airports, which are less convenient for consumers than the high-speed train's stations would be.

(D) The high-speed train line cannot use currently underutilized train stations in large cities.

(E) For long trips, most people prefer to fly rather than to take ground-level transportation.

OA C

Source: Official Guide
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Legendary Member
Posts: 2214
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2018 2:22 pm
Followed by:5 members

by deloitte247 » Sun Aug 18, 2019 12:39 pm

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

We need to find what opposes the argument presented.
Premise: A plane can be bought with one-third of the price of a train-line.
Conclusion: A sufficient market for the train will not exist.

Option A - Incorrect
This doesn't weaken the argument. It provides an added advantage to the use of cars, buses, and planes rather than the train.

Option B - Incorrect
This can prove to be a weakness to the argument, but it doesn't severely weaken the argument because it is already known to the argument that the train is quite fast.

Option C - Correct
This weakens the argument presented because it gives a reason why a sufficient market for the train can exist.
It further shows that a train is more convenient being a freewheel system which the plane is not.

Option D - Incorrect
If true, it gives a reason to why a sufficient market for trains cannot exist.

Option E - Incorrect
This supports the argument. It shows that most people prefer to use the airplane by flying than use ground transportation, which also includes trains.

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Jul 16, 2019 4:10 am

reply

by rishab0507 » Thu Aug 22, 2019 7:53 am

Timer

00:00

Your Answer

A

B

C

D

E

Global Stats

Premise: Train is not cost effective than plane and has constraints in movement
conclusion : that train is not best MoT
we need to weaken the conclusion , so we need to find something that works in favor of train


(A) Cars, buses, and planes require the efforts of drivers and pilots to guide them, whereas the train will be guided mechanically. : If here word would have been electronically ,this would have made it better statement,giving edge over others. As of now INCORRECT

(B) Cars and buses are not nearly as fast as the high-speed train will be. : We need to compare cost with place, Cars , buses are extra thing to compare with. INCORRECT

(C) Planes are not a free-wheel system because they can fly only between airports, which are less convenient for consumers than the high-speed train's stations would be. : This clearly opposes the conclusion providing what advantage trains can offer: CORRECT

(D) The high-speed train line cannot use currently underutilized train stations in large cities. : Out of scope: INCORRECT

(E) For long trips, most people prefer to fly rather than to take ground-level transportation. : INCORRECT