Business manager: Our new product should be packaged with plastic shel

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

Business manager: Our new product should be packaged with plastic shells manufactured using vacuum forming technologies, and not those of injection molding. The vacuum forming process requires the creation of molds that are far cheaper to manufacture than those needed for injection molding.

Engineer: The molds used in the injection molding process are forged from a beryllium-copper alloy which can withstand the cumulative damage caused by the production of 100 times more packaging shells than the materials used to make vacuum forming molds.

The engineer responds to the business manager by


A. forming an objection to the business manager's suggestion by emphasizing a flaw in the logic of that suggestion

Incorrect.

To answer this Dialog Analysis question, first break down the business manager's argument. The first sentence is a recommendation (should) and is the conclusion. The second sentence is factual, a premise in support of that conclusion:

Premise: vacuum forming molds are cheaper than injection molding molds
=
Conclusion: packaging for the product should be made using vacuum forming

Possible Assumption: because molds are cheaper the entire operation will be cheaper

Next, break down the engineer's response:

(i) The injection molding molds can make 100 times more packaging pieces than the vacuum forming molds - data that exposes the assumption

Although the engineer reveals details that undermine the business manager's plan, he or she does not explicitly object to the manager's plan. The engineer merely provides data, not an opinion.


B. highlighting an inherent flaw in the reasoning adopted by the business manager in order for the conclusion to have been formed

Incorrect.

The business manager's reasoning is not really flawed. It is quite logical to suggest the use of a certain method because it is cheaper than another method. Therefore, any claim that the business manager's reasoning contains an inherent flaw is unfounded.

The engineer actually presents new, additional information which puts the proposal into question.


C. weakening the business manager's proposition with a concrete example that clearly contradicts the basis of that proposition

Incorrect.

The data provided in the engineer's statement is not an example of anything, but merely factual information. An example would be presenting a case of someone who used one or both types and the results.


D. providing evidence that supports an objection to the business manager's claim by introducing a factor that indirectly undermines that claim

By giving information about injection molding molds, the engineer undermines the business manager's conclusion. This data could serve as support for objecting to that conclusion.


E. presenting data that is in complete opposition to that used by the business manager in support of the proposal
Show Answer

Incorrect.

To answer this Dialog Analysis question, first break down the business manager's argument. The first sentence is a recommendation (should) and is the conclusion. The second sentence is factual, a premise in support of that conclusion:

Premise: vacuum forming molds are cheaper than injection molding molds
=
Conclusion: packaging for the product should be made using vacuum forming

Possible Assumption: because molds are cheaper the entire operation will be cheaper

Next, break down the engineer's response:

(i) The injection molding molds can make 100 times more packaging pieces than the vacuum forming molds - data that exposes the assumption

The phrase complete opposition in this answer choice means that the premises in the arguments of both the manager and engineer oppose one another. However, the fact that the injection molds are more durable (as presented by the engineer) materials can actually support the idea that they are more expensive than vacuum forming (as presented by the business manager).


_________________

A. forming an objection to the business manager's suggestion by emphasizing a flaw in the logic of that suggestion
no where did the engineer object the BMs suggestion

B. highlighting an inherent flaw in the reasoning adopted by the business manager in order for the conclusion to have been formed
Yes, he highlighted a flaw in the argument BM made in reaching a conclusion that their new product should be packaged with shells manufactured using VMT, and not those of IM coz the former is cheaper but having said that, he missed a point that the former is not strong enough

C. weakening the business manager's proposition with a concrete example that clearly contradicts the basis of that proposition
though he is kind of weakening the BMs proposition he is not contradicting the basis. he is just highlighting other things that manager has missed considering


D. providing evidence that supports an objection to the business manager's claim by introducing a factor that indirectly undermines that claim

There is no explicit objection to the claim made by manager anywhere in the argument so there can be no objection to that claim


E. presenting data that is in complete opposition to that used by the business manager in support of the proposal
Show Answer

Though he is providing alternate data, the data is not opposite to what manager has said

hence B

Business manager: Our new product should be packaged with plastic shells manufactured using vacuum forming technologies, and not those of injection molding. The vacuum forming process requires the creation of molds that are far cheaper to manufacture than those needed for injection molding.

Engineer: The molds used in the injection molding process are forged from a beryllium-copper alloy which can withstand the cumulative damage caused by the production of 100 times more packaging shells than the materials used to make vacuum forming molds.

The issue is Business Manager draws a conclusion on 'packaging' on the basis of 'manufacturing cost ONLY' of the moulds. Engineer rightly counters him by stating the decision cannot alone be considering 'manufacturing cost only' but also need to consider 'mould related - maintenance cost/ subsequent breakage costs'.

The engineer responds to the business manager by


A. forming an objection to the business manager's suggestion by emphasizing a flaw in the logic of that suggestion - Engineer has not questioned the logic of considering lower manufacturing costs in building up the logic by BM. Instead, engineer brings additional information (without emphasizing a flaw in the logic of that suggestion)

B. highlighting an inherent flaw in the reasoning adopted by the business manager in order for the conclusion to have been formed - Yes, conclusion should not have been reached solely on Manufacturing costs. 'Total Cost' over the life of mould should be considered.

C. weakening the business manager's proposition with a concrete example that clearly contradicts the basis of that proposition - Definitely not! Engineer has not spoken anything about manufacturing costs.

D. providing evidence that supports an objection to the business manager's claim by introducing a factor that indirectly undermines that claim - Engineer is not objecting the manufacturing costs.

E. presenting data that is in complete opposition to that used by the business manager in support of the proposal - Engineer has not presented data about manufacturing costs.

Hence, IMO - B
_________________

Business manager: Vacuum forming process instead of injection molding.

Engineer: Injection molding process instead of vacuum molding.

The engineer responds to the business manager by


A. forming an objection to the business manager's suggestion by emphasizing a flaw in the logic of that suggestion - Incorrect. The engineer doesn't emphasize the flaw in the logic of the manager's suggestion rather he highlighted the flaw in the reasoning of business manager.

B. highlighting an inherent flaw in the reasoning adopted by the business manager in order for the conclusion to have been formed - Correct.

C. weakening the business manager's proposition with a concrete example that clearly contradicts the basis of that proposition - Incorrect. The engineer does not weaken manager's proposition.

D. providing evidence that supports an objection to the business manager's claim by introducing a factor that indirectly undermines that claim - Incorrect

E. presenting data that is in complete opposition to that used by the business manager in support of the proposal. - Incorrect.

IMO B

Business manager: Our new product should be packaged with plastic shells manufactured using vacuum forming technologies, and not those of injection molding. The vacuum forming process requires the creation of molds that are far cheaper to manufacture than those needed for injection molding.

Note : Manager makes a statement and backs it up.

Engineer: The molds used in the injection molding process are forged from a beryllium-copper alloy which can withstand the cumulative damage caused by the production of 100 times more packaging shells than the materials used to make vacuum forming molds.

Note : Engineers throws light into the process by introducing an unknown.

The engineer responds to the business manager by


A. forming an objection to the business manager's suggestion by emphasizing a flaw in the logic of that suggestion - no direct objection, hence wrong

B. highlighting an inherent flaw in the reasoning adopted by the business manager in order for the conclusion to have been formed - only elaborated, not highlighted. hence wrong.

C. weakening the business manager's proposition with a concrete example that clearly contradicts the basis of that proposition - no example was given, hence wrong

D. providing evidence that supports an objection to the business manager's claim by introducing a factor that indirectly undermines that claim - subtlely let the manager know by giving an evidence that supports the objection, hence Correct

E. presenting data that is in complete opposition to that used by the business manager in support of the proposal - no direct objection, hence wrong

edit: May be I might have sidetracked as the conversation seemed too close to work.. finger's crossed..
_________________

So the engineer brings in new piece of information that is not at all considered by business manager. The engineer does not attack the argument or flow of argument in any fashion, but rather a vital piece of information that was not considered

Only B fits this criteria

Business manager: Our new product should be packaged with plastic shells manufactured using vacuum forming technologies, and not those of injection molding. The vacuum forming process requires the creation of molds that are far cheaper to manufacture than those needed for injection molding.

Engineer: The molds used in the injection molding process are forged from a beryllium-copper alloy which can withstand the cumulative damage caused by the production of 100 times more packaging shells than the materials used to make vacuum forming molds.

The engineer responds to the business manager by


A. forming an objection to the business manager's suggestion by emphasizing a flaw in the logic of that suggestion

B. highlighting an inherent flaw in the reasoning adopted by the business manager in order for the conclusion to have been formed

C. weakening the business manager's proposition with a concrete example that clearly contradicts the basis of that proposition

D. providing evidence that supports an objection to the business manager's claim by introducing a factor that indirectly undermines that claim

E. presenting data that is in complete opposition to that used by the business manager in support of the proposal

Final answer:D

B. highlighting an inherent flaw in the reasoning adopted by the business manager in order for the conclusion to have been formed

B is not the answer. B says "inherent flaw in the reasoning". Business manager does not have a flaw in his reasoning. On the contrary the engineer introduces a new variable (life of molds) which the business manager is not aware of.


D. providing evidence that supports an objection to the business manager's claim by introducing a factor that indirectly undermines that claim

D is the answer as the engineer provides evidence (life of molds) that supports an objection to business manager's claim (vacuum over injection-molding) by introducing a factor (life of molds) that indirectly (engineer does not directly say No you are wrong, he merely introduces a new fact) undermines that claim.