BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

weakens the argument

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 185
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 3:06 am
Thanked: 6 times

weakens the argument

by gmatnmein2010 » Sat Feb 06, 2010 2:26 am
The interstitial nucleus, a subregion of the brain's hypothalamus, is typically smaller for male cats than for female cats. A neurobiologist perFORMed autopsies on male cats who died from disease X, a disease affecting no more than .05 percent of male cats, and found that these male cats had interstitial nuclei that were as large as those generally found in female cats. Thus, the size of the interstitial nucleus determines whether or not male cats can contract disease X.

Which one of the following statements, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) No female cats have been known to contract disease X, which is a subtype of disease Y.

(B) Many male cats who contract disease X also contract disease Z, the cause of which is unknown.

(C) the interstitial nuclei of female cats who contact disease X are larger than those of female cats who do not contract disease X.

(D) Of 1,000 autopsies on male cats who did not contract disease X, 5 revealed interstitial nuclei larger than those of the average male cat.

(E) The hypothalamus is known not to be causally linked to disease Y, and disease X is a subtype of disease Y.
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:38 am
Thanked: 137 times
Followed by:5 members

by thephoenix » Sat Feb 06, 2010 2:53 am
A) Is irrelevant to the question
B) Z may be caused by this enlargement
C) Supports the argument for all cats, does nothing in regards to male cats
D) Does not show that all male cats with this disease have an enlargement
E) Weakens the argument some, because if X is a subtype of Y it should have similar properties and the hypothalamus has been shown to be unrelated to Y.
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 777
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:02 am
Location: Mumbai, India
Thanked: 117 times
Followed by:47 members

by komal » Mon Feb 08, 2010 8:08 am
gmatnmein2010 wrote:The interstitial nucleus, a subregion of the brain's hypothalamus, is typically smaller for male cats than for female cats. A neurobiologist perFORMed autopsies on male cats who died from disease X, a disease affecting no more than .05 percent of male cats, and found that these male cats had interstitial nuclei that were as large as those generally found in female cats. Thus, the size of the interstitial nucleus determines whether or not male cats can contract disease X.

Which one of the following statements, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

Cause - Size of Interstitial Nucleus (Hypothalamus)
Effect - Disease X

(A) No female cats have been known to contract disease X, which is a subtype of disease Y.
Incorrect : Issue is not about female cats contracting disease X. Issue is about MALE cats contracting disease X.

(B) Many male cats who contract disease X also contract disease Z, the cause of which is unknown.
Incorrect : Disease Z is irrelevant to the scope of the argument.

(C) the interstitial nuclei of female cats who contact disease X are larger than those of female cats who do not contract disease X.
Incorrect : Irrelevant

(D) Of 1,000 autopsies on male cats who did not contract disease X, 5 revealed interstitial nuclei larger than those of the average male cat.
Incorrect : Argument is about autopsies done on male cats who CONTRACTED disease X. Eliminated.

(E) The hypothalamus is known not to be causally linked to disease Y, and disease X is a subtype of disease Y.
Correct : This destroys the argument by implying that there must be an alternate cause for the stated effect (hypothalamus or its sub region is not a cause of disease y or its subtype disease x)
Hope this helps : )
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
Thanked: 173 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

by gmatmachoman » Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:11 am
Oh my God, after a long long time I am seeing good question CR after the streak of poor CR posted by many users.

This CR follows a common pattern of causal reasoning.

Pattern: Event A causes Result B.

How can we weaken it??

One way is to Produce a Event C cause result B or simply u can say Event A is NOT the culprit which caused B.

So E states that hypothalamus(event A) doesnt cause the result disease X( as X is linked to Y).
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
Thanked: 173 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

by gmatmachoman » Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:12 am
This CR follows a common pattern of causal reasoning.

Pattern: Event A causes Result B.

How can we weaken it??

One way is to Produce a Event C cause result B or simply u can say Event A is NOT the culprit which caused B.

So E states that hypothalamus(event A) doesnt cause the result disease X( as X is linked to Y).
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 10:23 am

by joseph32 » Sun May 15, 2016 10:55 pm
Well I feel E is the answer. I guess I'm right. If some expert could throw light on the reasoning it would be a big help
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1