jaituteja wrote:
Narenn wrote:
prasannar wrote:
Insect infestations in certain cotton-growing regions of the world have caused dramatic increases in the price of cotton on the world market. By contrast, the price of soybeans has long remained stable. Knowing that cotton plants mature quickly, many soybean growers in Ortovia plan to cease growing soybeans and begin raising cotton instead, thereby taking advantage of the high price of cotton to increase their income significantly, at least over the next several years.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the plan’s chances for success?
(A) The cost of raising soybeans has increased significantly over the past several years and is expected to continue to climb.
(B) Tests of a newly developed, inexpensive pesticide have shown it to be both environmentally safe and effective against the insects that have infested cotton crops.
(C) In the past several years, there has been no sharp increase in the demand for cotton and for goods made out of cotton.
(D) Few consumers would be willing to pay significantly higher prices for cotton goods than they are now paying.
(E) The species of insect that has infested cotton plants has never been known to attack soybean plants.
jaituteja wrote:
Why is C wrong..???
if there has been no demand in the past, then even after producing the cotton, what is the guarantee that cotton will be sold at high price???
Choice C says, there has been no sharp increase in the demand for cotton. That does not imply that the demand has fallen down. Soybean farmers can still make more money by selling cotton at higher prices to cater current demand.
Choice B directly attacks the conclusion. According to B, newly developed pesticide, which is inexpensive, will soon be used by cotton growers globally, resulting in increased supply of cotton, which will affect the current high prices of cotton
jaituteja wrote:
That means.. either the demand is steady or it has fallen..!!!
So, selling cotton at higher prices(compared with the selling price of soyabean) will given them more profit...
What if the demand has fallen to a certain level, that the profits made out of it( during the high prices of cotton) were equal to that of soyabean.
I hope you are getting, what i mean to say...
10*10 => 100
5* 20 => 100...
There wont be any benefit for switching to cotton...[ I am assuming only the case when demand has decreased].
I mean this could be a scenario..
Well, I think you are too much inclined towards Choice C.
Dude, while approaching any weakening conclusion question we should understand how things work. In a CR stimulus, conclusion depends on the certain facts. These facts may be given(stated) or assumed. All these facts act as pillars and support the conclusion.
Let's take the case of our stimulus....
Fact (Given) :- Supplies of the cotton in the world market has been affected severely because of insect infestation in cotton growing region. Due to the short supplies prices of the cotton in the world market have been increased dramatically.
Fact(Given) :- The prices of soybean have been long stable
Fact(Given) :- Considering the above circumstance soybean growers in Ortovia above plan to cease soybean growing and to raise cotton instead
Conclusion :- Taking Advantage of increased price of cotton
Fact (Assumed) :- Insect infestation will not affect the cotton crop in ortovia
Fact (Assumed) :- Prices of the cotton in world market will remain be high till the cotton plants of ortovia farmers get mature.
Fact (Assumed) :- Demand for the cotton will not fall in the world market till the cotton plants of ortovia farmers get mature.
Fact (Assumed) :- Circumstance in the traditional cotton growing regions will not improve atleast till the cotton plants of ortovia farmers get mature.
Fact (Assumed) :- Cost of growing cotton in ortovia is not greater enough so as to loose the benefit the ortovia farmers got from switching to cotton.
These are only few. There can be many such assumes facts which buttress the argument. Since as per the fundamental rule of weakening we can not go against stated facts. i.e. we can not prove the premises wrong, our job is to attack these assumed facts, just as we did in above case.
After reading any CR stimulus and question, we should consider the assumed facts. Based on the assumed facts we should think about the possible answer to that question and should then approach the answer choices in attacking mindset. This way you can spot the correct answer choice with ease in most of the cases.
I will not say that this is the ideal way of solving a CR question. I would only say that this works better for me.
It is good that you are considering all aspects of the answer choice. But doing this with every answer choice ,that too with not guessing the possible answer, can be problematic in the exam.
As for your specific query about choice C, it is mentioned that there has been no
sharp increase in the demand for the cotton. so it can be derived that atleast minor but steady increase was there, so no such scenario as decrease in demand exists.
Hope that helps.