Critics of heli-skiing, a sport in which private companies use helicop : Critical Reasoning (CR)

B

Makesh89

Intern

Joined: 11 Jan 2021

Posts: 32

Own Kudos [?]: 7 [2]

Given Kudos: 319

Location: Kenya

GMAT 1: 680 Q45 V33

Send PM

Re: Critics of heli-skiing, a sport in which private companies use helicop [#permalink]

11 Jun 2021, 06:38

2

Kudos

To me D seems to make much sense than A. The conclusion is that they should continue with the sport coz it doesn't course harm to others. So D, counters the argument by stating that insurances are expensive to every skier because of heli. Therefore hurting others in the longterm.

Posted from my mobile device

S

speedrevision37

Intern

Joined: 30 Jan 2021

Posts: 15

Own Kudos [?]: 26 [2]

Given Kudos: 7

Send PM

Re: Critics of heli-skiing, a sport in which private companies use helicop [#permalink]

11 Jun 2021, 08:35

2

Kudos

IMO Option D is the correct answer
Supporters claim that heli-skiers do not harm others and take all risks themselves but if due to their high chances of injury, the overall insurance cost for the skiers increases, they are harming others interests.

G

harshtandel838

Manager

Joined: 25 May 2018

Posts: 92

Own Kudos [?]: 68 [1]

Given Kudos: 79

GMAT 1: 550 Q44 V22 Verified score

GMAT 2: 550 Q46 V20 Verified score

GPA: 3.2

Send PM

Re: Critics of heli-skiing, a sport in which private companies use helicop [#permalink]

07 Jun 2021, 07:23

1

Kudos

I chose answer choice A;
Here’s my analysis correct me if I’m wrong at any point.

Critics claim heli-skiing as a dangerous and irresponsible activity.
Supportersclaim heli-skiers personally take that risk and do not harm others as a result of the sport.

By POE I’ve eliminated all other answer choices except A

B: this supports Supporters claim
C: we are not concerned about popularity of sport
D: Although it shows that because of accidents everyone has to pay higher insurance rates. Still it it not harm that would result from sport. Eliminate D
E: Many don’t take first aid kit with them.! Still it is not relevant

A: This option mentions that rescuers are not often able to reach injured heli-skiers in time to save their lives. Supporters claim is that they do not harm others as a result of the sport. I don’t know whether this activity actually does harms to others or not

Can anyone explain option A

Posted from my mobile device

B

AlexTheTrainer

Tutor

Joined: 04 Jun 2021

Posts: 75

Own Kudos [?]: 99 [1]

Given Kudos: 13

Send PM

Re: Critics of heli-skiing, a sport in which private companies use helicop [#permalink]

11 Jun 2021, 06:57

1

Kudos

Expert Reply

Reading Makesh89’s reply, I knew immediately that one of us didn’t know how to read. Of course, I thought Makesh89 had completely missed the phrase “those skiers” in (D) but it turns out I’m the one who doesn’t know how to read.

(D) says that insurance rates will be raised for ALL skiers. Not just for THOSE (heli-skiers) skiers. So yeah, D weakens because higher insurance rates are definitely harmful to others.

I could’ve sworn it said “those”...

Posted from my mobile device

B

AlexTheTrainer

Tutor

Joined: 04 Jun 2021

Posts: 75

Own Kudos [?]: 99 [0]

Given Kudos: 13

Send PM

Re: Critics of heli-skiing, a sport in which private companies use helicop [#permalink]

10 Jun 2021, 04:53

Expert Reply

IMO: no answer weakens the conclusion.

Only one piece of evidence to support the conclusion that people should be allowed to heli-ski: they aren’t hurting anyone else.

Answer (A) indicates that these thrill-seeking super-rich dummies are going to get themselves killed. But the evidence indicates that this is not an issue. Libertines (excuse me, libertarians) are convinced that they have every right to kill themselves. Stupid? Of course. But that’s not the issue here.

Posted from my mobile device

B

i5haan

Intern

Joined: 08 Dec 2020

Posts: 3

Own Kudos [?]: 0 [0]

Given Kudos: 7

Send PM

Critics of heli-skiing, a sport in which private companies use helicop [#permalink]

11 Jun 2021, 04:34

Unpopular Opinion: How about E ?
If they refuse to take first aid kits and glares with them, they might hurt the biodiversity or a person maybe there for some other work because not wearing glares will lead to them not being able to see and no first aid kit will further intensify the cause i.e. injury in this scenario. ==> Injury to the other person/ being

B

AlexTheTrainer

Tutor

Joined: 04 Jun 2021

Posts: 75

Own Kudos [?]: 99 [0]

Given Kudos: 13

Send PM

Re: Critics of heli-skiing, a sport in which private companies use helicop [#permalink]

11 Jun 2021, 04:49

Expert Reply

The following is drawn from American “common law” and the US Constitution

Is it REASONABLE to assert that “hurting others” includes hurting biodiversity?

Is it REASONABLE to assert that someone will be working on an otherwise deserted mountain?

I would submit that the answer to both questions is “no”.

You are absolutely correct in your assertion that (E) COULD lead to hurting others. But that’s not the issue. The issue is whether your assertion is reasonable.

Over 20 years ago, I learned that an “objective legal standard” is based on reasonableness. Took me almost as long to accept this idea. But it is a very real thing.

Posted from my mobile device

B

ueh55406

Manager

Joined: 19 Dec 2020

Posts: 161

Own Kudos [?]: 39 [0]

Given Kudos: 316

Send PM

Re: Critics of heli-skiing, a sport in which private companies use helicop [#permalink]

11 Jun 2021, 10:18

Bunuel wrote:

Critics of heli-skiing, a sport in which private companies use helicopters to airlift skiers to remote mountain peaks, denounce it as a dangerous and irresponsible activity. Supporters of heli-skiing counter that while heli-skiers personally take risks, they do not harm others as a result of the sport, and therefore should be allowed to pursue it.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument of the supporters of heli-skiing?

A Because of the remoteness of the sport, rescuers are not often able to reach injured heli-skiers in time to save their lives.
B Often heli-skiing companies take the considerable time and expense to train new heli-skiers on how to pursue the sport safely.
C Because of accidents in the last few years,heli-skiing has become much less popular in Nordic countries.
D Insurance rates for all skiers are higher because of the numerous accidents suffered by heli-skiers.
E Many heli-skiers refuse to take flares or first-aid kits with them on the runs.

E , Hands down. why would it be A ?

A Because of the remoteness of the sport, rescuers are not often able to reach injured heli-skiers in time to save their lives.

heli-skiers personally take risks, they do not harm others as a result of the sport, and therefore should be allowed to pursue it >> they've already made peace with the idea that skiers might get injured or something. The only justification for supporting this sport is that it doesn't harm others.

E Many heli-skiers refuse to take flares or first-aid kits with them on the runs
>> this gives a reason as to why skiers might risk other's as well.

let me know the flaw in reasoning.

B

AlexTheTrainer

Tutor

Joined: 04 Jun 2021

Posts: 75

Own Kudos [?]: 99 [0]

Given Kudos: 13

Send PM

Re: Critics of heli-skiing, a sport in which private companies use helicop [#permalink]

11 Jun 2021, 11:12

Expert Reply

ueh55406 wrote:

Bunuel wrote:

E , Hands down. why would it be A ?

A Because of the remoteness of the sport, rescuers are not often able to reach injured heli-skiers in time to save their lives.

heli-skiers personally take risks, they do not harm others as a result of the sport, and therefore should be allowed to pursue it >> they've already made peace with the idea that skiers might get injured or something. The only justification for supporting this sport is that it doesn't harm others.

E Many heli-skiers refuse to take flares or first-aid kits with them on the runs
>> this gives a reason as to why skiers might risk other's as well.

let me know the flaw in reasoning.

The skiers are in remote areas. Reasonable to assume that no one else is around.

D shows how hell-skiers harm others - through increased insurance rates.

Posted from my mobile device

B

hardik1997

Intern

Joined: 30 Apr 2021

Posts: 6

Own Kudos [?]: 8 [0]

Given Kudos: 26

Send PM

Re: Critics of heli-skiing, a sport in which private companies use helicop [#permalink]

11 Jun 2021, 21:04

Argument - heli skiing is not harmful to others hence should be allowed.

therefore very simply put, a statement that somehow shows that heli skiing is harmful to other will weaken the argument.

A Because of the remoteness of the sport, rescuers are not often able to reach injured heli-skiers in time to save their lives.
- Incorrect. This shows that it is harmful for the heli skiers not others

B Often heli-skiing companies take the considerable time and expense to train new heli-skiers on how to pursue the sport safely.
-Incorrect. Out of context

C Because of accidents in the last few years,heli-skiing has become much less popular in Nordic countries.
- Incorrect. Out of context nothing about countries is there in the passage

D Insurance rates for all skiers are higher because of the numerous accidents suffered by heli-skiers.
- correct. Now this statement shows that it is actually affecting others as for “all skiers” the rates are high because of “heli skiers”. Hence weakening the argument that others are not affected

E Many heli-skiers refuse to take flares or first-aid kits with them on the runs.
- Incorrect. Even if they refuse to take these items their (heli skiers) life will be at risk and be harmed. Other may or may not be affected simply because others may or may not carry these items and moreover it is written that this happens on a remote mountain where others might not even be present. Very clearly incorrect answer

Posted from my mobile device

P

Crytiocanalyst

Director

Joined: 16 Jun 2021

Posts: 994

Own Kudos [?]: 183 [0]

Given Kudos: 309

Send PM

Re: Critics of heli-skiing, a sport in which private companies use helicop [#permalink]

16 Jul 2021, 23:30

A Because of the remoteness of the sport, rescuers are not often able to reach injured heli-skiers in time to save their lives.
It doesn't weaken since it is said that it's carried out in personnal risk

B Often heli-skiing companies take the considerable time and expense to train new heli-skiers on how to pursue the sport safely
This strengthen hell-sking participants
C Because of accidents in the last few years,heli-skiing has become much less popular in Nordic countries.
Thia is throughly out of context

D Insurance rates for all skiers are higher because of the numerous accidents suffered by heli-skiers.
Since INsurance is funded by individuals every of the concerned individuals is getting affected

E Many heli-skiers refuse to take flares or first-aid kits with them on the runs.
Similar reasoning as A
Hence IMO D

B

saurabhmishrano1

Intern

Joined: 25 May 2021

Posts: 15

Own Kudos [?]: 5 [0]

Given Kudos: 18

Send PM

Re: Critics of heli-skiing, a sport in which private companies use helicop [#permalink]

05 Apr 2024, 22:31

A.Because of the remoteness of the sport, rescuers are not often able to reach injured heli-skiers in time to save their lives.

This option weakens the argument of the supporters of heli-skiing because it highlights a potential harm that extends beyond the participants themselves. If rescuers cannot reach injured heli-skiers in time, it suggests that the sport's risks could lead to negative consequences beyond the individuals involved, contradicting the claim that heli-skiers do not harm others as a result of the sport.

B.Often heli-skiing companies take the considerable time and expense to train new heli-skiers on how to pursue the sport safely.

This option doesn't significantly weaken the argument of the supporters. The fact that heli-skiing companies train new heli-skiers on safety measures could actually be seen as a positive aspect of the sport, suggesting that participants are adequately prepared to minimize risks.

C. Because of accidents in the last few years,heli-skiing has become much less popular in Nordic countries.

This option also doesn't directly weaken the argument. The popularity of heli-skiing in Nordic countries may fluctuate for various reasons unrelated to its safety or potential harm to others.

D.Insurance rates for all skiers are higher because of the numerous accidents suffered by heli-skiers.

This option weakens the argument by indicating a broader impact beyond the individual heli-skiers. If insurance rates for all skiers are higher due to accidents suffered by heli-skiers, it implies that the sport's risks have financial consequences for others, undermining the claim that heli-skiers do not harm others as a result of the sport.

Example:
Let's consider an example to illustrate this:

Imagine a ski resort that offers both traditional skiing and heli-skiing options. The heli-skiing portion of the resort is operated by a separate company that frequently experiences accidents and injuries among its participants. Due to the high frequency of accidents associated with heli-skiing, insurance companies may increase the insurance rates for all skiers visiting the resort, regardless of whether they participate in heli-skiing or not.

Now, let's say there are two skiers visiting the resort: one who prefers traditional skiing and another who opts for heli-skiing. Despite the traditional skier never engaging in heli-skiing, they are still affected by the increased insurance rates resulting from the accidents and injuries associated with heli-skiing. As a result, the traditional skier ends up paying higher insurance premiums, indirectly bearing the financial burden of the risks posed by heli-skiing.

In this scenario, even though the traditional skier did not directly participate in heli-skiing and did not experience any harm themselves, they are still negatively impacted by the sport's risks. The increased insurance rates affect all skiers, regardless of their individual activities, demonstrating how heli-skiing can indirectly harm others by imposing financial consequences on them.

E.Many heli-skiers refuse to take flares or first-aid kits with them on the runs.

This option also weakens the argument by suggesting that heli-skiers may be ill-prepared to handle emergencies. Refusing to carry essential safety equipment like flares or first-aid kits increases the likelihood of harm and contradicts the assertion that heli-skiers do not harm others as a result of the sport.

Among the options provided, option D most seriously weakens the argument of the supporters of heli-skiing by demonstrating a broader impact on insurance rates for all skiers, indicating that the risks associated with the sport have consequences beyond the individual participants.

gmatclubot

Re: Critics of heli-skiing, a sport in which private companies use helicop [#permalink]

05 Apr 2024, 22:31

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Critics of heli-skiing, a sport in which private companies use helicop