Critical Reasoning

Wondering if we could have a concrete approach to solve such CR where the argument conclude in a broader sense but starts with a specific evidence....

i cant she the problem can u please post in word format

dude it is in word doc only...i am able to open here...please try and let me know

I think the answer is A...
This is defender assumption in which you eliminate that point if raised would go against the argument.

The conclusion of the argument is S handled rakes are better than new rakes for lowering risk of spinal injury. But what if there are other forms that cause injuries as a result of raking. If there are, then the conclusion would be weakened...

Hence A has to be the assumption..

u have posted the document in "docx" format...probably pradeepkaushal9518 wanted the doc to be posted in '.doc' format

ssgmatter wrote:dude it is in word doc only...i am able to open here...please try and let me know

Conclusion:
straight rakes (old) are better than s-shaped rakes (new) for minimizing risk of spinal injury.


Compression injury is implied as the cause of damage of spine. there could be other causes that cause spinal injury Unless other reasons are eliminated we cannot derive the conclusion
A is doing this job by stating that the compression injury is the only cause.