Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 06:59 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 06:59
Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 105,389
Own Kudos:
778,232
 [3]
Given Kudos: 99,977
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 105,389
Kudos: 778,232
 [3]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Priyank1905
Joined: 05 May 2025
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 17
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 16
Posts: 17
Kudos: 11
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
vanshikajain1606
Joined: 18 May 2025
Last visit: 03 Nov 2025
Posts: 5
Own Kudos:
1
 [1]
Given Kudos: 11
Location: India
Posts: 5
Kudos: 1
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
PeanutButter429
Joined: 18 Feb 2025
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 17
Own Kudos:
7
 [1]
Given Kudos: 10
Posts: 17
Kudos: 7
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
If (A) were true, it would actually mean: Even though more things are illegal now, fewer people commit crimes. Which implies an even stronger case that morality improved.

Could be (D) as it gives an alternative reason to lower crime rates.

But then again this question is a bit weird so I hope someone could clarify. I just don't think any of the answers are, it.
vanshikajain1606
I believe it should be A.
A. Many actions that were considered morally acceptable 200 years ago have been criminalized by modern legal systems - This seems to be a new information which shows why there might be a discrepancy in concluding that "people are more morally aware today than people were 200 years ago". If there are more actions considered as crime now, more people would be considered as criminals compared to 200 years ago on doing the same thing.
User avatar
JackyJan
Joined: 10 May 2025
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 13
Own Kudos:
10
 [1]
Given Kudos: 5
Location: Germany
Products:
Posts: 13
Kudos: 10
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I agree with PeanutButter429

Option (A) is strengthening the argument not weakening it imo - If today actions that were not penalized in the past, are penalized -> this would lead to a higher punishment rate, thus more people breaking the law

But the argument says that the rate dropped -> So the rate dropped ALTHOUGH people can be punished because of more actions today -> this would only hold if people dont commit those crimes -> thus they have to be morally more aware

So it cant be (A) & this leaves me only with (D) as the others are clearly not correct

(D) -> Less controlling -> crime rate dropped because people are not punished -> An alternative explanation for the rate drop -> Common pattern in weakening questions -> finding another variable that could be the reason
User avatar
arushi118
Joined: 21 Jul 2024
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 48
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 404
Products:
Posts: 48
Kudos: 7
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Same for me - Cannot quite understand how C is correct, as C says: some people think that illegal acts are moral.
My reasoning: proportion of ppl who break the law have become lesser -> so illegal acts have become lesser -> so even if some people think that illegal acts are moral how can we say that the proportion of people who are moral are more or less just on this basis.

Bunuel can you please help with this.
PeanutButter429
If (A) were true, it would actually mean: Even though more things are illegal now, fewer people commit crimes. Which implies an even stronger case that morality improved.

Could be (D) as it gives an alternative reason to lower crime rates.

But then again this question is a bit weird so I hope someone could clarify. I just don't think any of the answers are, it.

User avatar
miag
Joined: 10 Dec 2023
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 188
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 143
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Sustainability
GMAT Focus 1: 675 Q87 V83 DI80
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 675 Q87 V83 DI80
Posts: 188
Kudos: 73
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
You're right on A) strengthening rather than weakening the conclusion which is why we can safely reject it
I think there are some flaws in this reasoning: first of all proportion of people breaking the law being less doesnt equate to illegal acts becoming lesser as we dont know the total people and how it compares to 200 years ago.
D) is completely irrelevant - we have no link between the modern methods and people's moral awareness so we cannot ascertain the impact of this option on the conclusion and whether it weakens or strengthens it.
C) Lets break this down - this says that some people consider illegal acts as not immoral - meaning they think it’s acceptable or morally fine to commit certain illegal acts. This breaks the conclusion because it implies that the lower proportion is not necessarily due to higher morality among people.

Hope this helps!
arushi118
Same for me - Cannot quite understand how C is correct, as C says: some people think that illegal acts are moral.
My reasoning: proportion of ppl who break the law have become lesser -> so illegal acts have become lesser -> so even if some people think that illegal acts are moral how can we say that the proportion of people who are moral are more or less just on this basis.

Bunuel can you please help with this.

User avatar
Dishg
Joined: 14 Jun 2025
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 1
Own Kudos:
1
 [1]
Products:
Posts: 1
Kudos: 1
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The core assumption in this question is they treat breaking the law = immoral behavior and that crime rates reflect morality. So if fewer people break the law, they must be more moral.
and we need to weaken this by showing that the lower crime rate doesn’t necessarily mean greater morality.

In option C: if something can be illegal without being immoral, then changes in the rate of law-breaking tell us nothing about moral awareness.
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
188 posts