I’m not karishma but maybe I can help a bit?
There are 2 different question “types” that show up. The more common is the usual Weaken the Argument type question. If this were a “which one of the following weakens the conclusion” question stem, then option D would be within the realm of a possible answer. It’s not the activities fault for the obesity, D shows it’s something else.
This question falls into the rarer type of expose the flaw in the author’s logic type of question. You’re not really asked to Weaken the question per se. The question is asking you to expose a flaw in how the author used the facts and got to her conclusion (the logic/reasoning).
You have to think about what the author is assuming when she looks at the facts and makes the conclusion.
Here, the author sees 1,500 obese people and 1,200 ppl who take the extracurricular activities. She then concludes these activities are not strenuous enough.
What flaw is the author making when she looks at the facts and makes this conclusion?
She must be assuming that the 1,200 people are part of if not all of the 1,500 people who are obese. Otherwise her conclusion would not make sense. This is the flaw in her logic. No where does it say that the people have to be the same. There could be 100,000 kids at this school: the 1,200 are perfectly fit while the 1,500 do not even take the activities and are obese.
The author is not considering this. If she did, then it’s an assumption she made and it’s faulty.
Hopefully something helps?
Actually the powerscore book has a good section that goes over these types of questions. I believe they call them “method of reasoning” or “flaw in the reasoning” q types.
I do remember a good section where powerscore goes over all the different types of reasoning errors that show up time and time again.
Errors of Composition, errors of division, “straw man”, etc.
kagrawal16
Hi
VeritasKarishma,
Please help eliminate option D.
My reasoning is
The conclusion is causal. It says that the activities are not rigorous enough "caused" the obesity.
In powerscore, we learn that-
1. x caused y. “The stated cause is “the only possible cause” of the effect and consequently the stated cause will always produce the effect”. Thats x is sufficient and necessary for y. Can be weakened by showing cause but no effect (sufficient weakener) or effect but no cause (necessary weakener).
Also, the other types are
2. x causes y. here we weaken by showing cause no effect (sufficient weakener).
3. Only x causes Y. here we weaken by showing effect no cause (necessary weakener).
I just hope my understanding regarding causal reasoning is correct
I felt this question did fall in type 1.
So it follows that the flaw is the assumption that not rigorous activities is the only cause ?
The overlapping of groups is an evident logical gap to pick C. But how to eliminate D

Also is this line of reasoning correct that -
Flaw is intrinsic and assumption adds new info to the argument. Therefore any new information in the choices as in D that there are alternate causes x and y is incorrect. Hence eliminate ?
Had the option been that
D) it assumes that only not rigorous activities cause obesity. Would it be correct then ?
Can you help ?
Posted from my mobile device