LR Question 23 Explanation
QUESTION TEXT: Editor: The city’s previous recycling program…
QUESTION TYPE: Weaken
CONCLUSION: It’s wrong to think that the increased number of pickup days will lead to more recycling.
REASONING: The city now has more pickup days for recycling. People will put out the same amount of recyclables. They’ll just spread it out over more days.
ANALYSIS: The author ignores second-order effects. That’s where one change causes another change.
Basically, the author is treating recycling volume as entirely fixed. But humans are….human. If it’s easier to recycle, we’ll probably recycle more. So having more recycling days might lead to more recycling volume, because there are more chances to recycle.
Two of the answers weaken the city’s plan, therefore strengthening the editor’s argument. This is backwards. You’re supposed to weaken the editor’s argument by strengthening the plan.
___________
- So? It costs me less to write explanations than it costs Apple to manufacture computers, but that doesn’t mean computers are a bad business. This is an irrelevant comparison.
- The editor was arguing the program wouldn’t work. This answer strengthens the argument by showing the program might not work even if there is more recycling.
You’re supposed to weaken the argument. - This is answer is trying to make you assume “Ah, overall pickup costs will be down. That weakens!”. Nope. The city is doing twice the pickups now. Even if they’re shorter, it still probably costs more to do two.
- CORRECT. If a weekly schedule is much easier to “adhere to”, that means people are more likely to actually put out recyclables under the new scheme. That could increase recycling volume, which contradicts the editor’s argument.
- If the contractor charges more, then recycling is more expensive. That strengthens the editor’s argument that the new plan won’t save money.
But you’re supposed to weaken the argument.
More Resources for Weaken Questions
- Intro Course lesson: This intro course lesson covers Weaken questions.
- Mastery Seminar lesson: This LR Mastery seminar lesson covers weaken questions.
(C) Because the volume of recyclables people accumulate during a week is less than what they accumulate during two weeks, the city expects a recyclables pickup to take less time under the new program.
Can we say that (C) is wrong because (C) just compares time taken for recyclables collected in a week vs collected in two weeks and it doesn’t shed any light on the recyclables volume change so our confidence in the argument’s conclusion remains unchanged?
Yep, I’d say that’s another big reason C doesn’t help us weaken the argument. Thank you for your comment!