Investigator: XYZ Coins has misled its clients by promoting some coins as “extremely rare” when in fact those coins are relatively common and readily available.
XYZ Agent: That is ridiculous. XYZ Coins is one of the largest coin dealers in the world. We authenticate the coins we sell through a nationally recognized firm and operate a licensed coin dealership.
The XYZ agent’s reply is most vulnerable to the criticism that it
(A) exaggerates the investigator’s claims in order to make them appear absurd
(B) accuses the investigator of bias but presents no evidence to support that accusation
(C) fails to establish that other coin dealers do not also authenticate the coins those dealers sell
(D) lists strengths of XYZ Coins while failing to address the investigator’s charge
(E) provides no definition for the inherently vague phrase “extremely rare”
I eliminated D because the XYZ agent give the "facts"...they aren't really the strengths of the company...i mean it can be a mandate for such industry type to sell coins through recognized firm...and hence chose E by POE.
Someone pls help me understand option D
Your doubt is justified but I see D as the most appropriate answer choice indeed.
First of all, for Bold Face CR, method of reasoning and parallel reasoning questions, the range of the words may vary a great deal but still can be considered relevant.
e.g. in "D", although FACTS may be mentioned, but those properties can be considered STRENGTHS as well. Even if that is a part of the law or is a mandate, you can't deny they are strengths at the same time. So, any synonymous words close to FACTS, STRENGTHS, EXTRAORDINARY TRAITS etc. could be considered correct to describe XYZ's rebuttal. The words in these types of question fall in a big spectrum, making the questions more difficult.
The later part of D:
"failing to address the investigator’s charge"
This tells us that the investigator's charge that the coins provided are not rare, but rather commonplace. XYZ doesn't refute this challenge at all. XYZ doesn't say anything such as:
The coins are unique and your theory is baseless and without evidence.
The coins that available outside may look similar but are inherently different from what we provide, so our claim still stands.
"E" could be correct IF investigator said something like this:
XYZ Coins market its coins as "extremely rare" and trying to deceive the customers, for most customers don't actually understand what "extremely rare" actually means.
From the argument, it is clear that both parties agree on the usage of the word "extremely rare", a word neither of them thinks needed clarification.