Dentist: Your products contain high quantities of sugar, which causes

Question

Dentist: Your products contain high quantities of sugar, which causes cavities. Since there are other sweeteners that you could use which do not cause cavities, it is clear that you intend to destroy children’s teeth.

Candy Manufacturer: But sugar is natural, whereas the other sweeteners are artificial.

The candy manufacturer’s response is flawed because it ____________.

(A) assumes without warrant that intent is in some way related to artificiality

(B) does not disprove the dentist’s contention that sugar causes cavities

(C) does not question the dentist’s description of the quantity of sugar as “high”

(D) fails to indicate the link between artificiality and cavities

(E) contradicts the premise of the dentist’s argument rather than the conclusion

JiddiHuMain · Answer

Hey Can someone please explain why A is correct ??

As per my analysis D seems correct, because it is a flaw question.

Sandeep568 · Answer

Can someone please explain why A is correct?

Sumi1010 · Answer

In this argument, the dentist accused the manufacturer for an intention of destroying children's teeth with the cavities. The manufacturer defends himself saying that he is focussed on adding only  natural  sweetener to the candy (and hence is not at fault).

The gap in the response - Assumption that there is a connect between his intention and artificiality.

(A) assumes without warrant that intent is in some way related to artificiality
 The cases of Sugar cavities (i.e. premise) results to the Bad intention of manufacturer (i.e. conclusion). 
While responding, the manufacturer is worried about countering the conclusion and not the premise. He was supposed to make the connect between Intention and artificiality.  
(B) does not disprove the dentist’s contention that sugar causes cavities
 The manufacturer did not question the claim that Sugar causes cavities. 
(C) does not question the dentist’s description of the quantity of sugar as “high”
 Quantity is not a concern in the argument. 
(D) fails to indicate the link between  artificiality and cavities 
 This could have been correct choice if the conclusion had been about cavities. The manufacturer failed to connect the below
1. Cavities and artificiality 
2. Intention and artificiality. 
The cases of Sugar cavities (i.e. premise) results to the Bad intention of manufacturer (i.e. conclusion). 
While responding, the manufacturer is worried about countering the conclusion and not the premise. He was supposed to make the connect between Intention and artificiality.  
(E) contradicts the premise of the dentist’s argument  rather than the conclusion 
 Dentist's conclusion is - Bad intention of manufacturer. 
The manufacturer defends himself against the accusation of bad intention (i.e. conclusion) and not the fact that sugar causes cavities.

IMO  A

CrackverbalGMAT · Answer

Pre-thinking:

The dentist makes an accusation about the manufacturer's intention, which the manufacturer refutes by stating that he/she is focused on using natural rather than artificial sweeteners. Therefore, the obvious gap in this argument is the connection/link between intent and originality/artificiality - no link has been made out or is logically obvious.

Let us examine the answer options.

(A) assumes without warrant that intent is in some way related to artificiality  Correct answer and consistent with our pre-thinking.

(B) does not disprove the dentist’s contention that sugar causes cavities  It is not necessary to dispute one of the premises in order to dispute the conclusion ie; the accusation on intent. Hence this cannot be the flaw in the manufacturer's defense. Eliminate.

(C) does not question the dentist’s description of the quantity of sugar as “high”  Same error as in (B). Eliminate.

(D) fails to indicate the link between artificiality and cavities  This is a tempting choice on first reading. However, the manufacturer is defending him/herself against an accusation made about his/her intent and not regarding the artificiality or cavities. Hence this link is not necessary to be made. Eliminate.

(E) contradicts the premise of the dentist’s argument rather than the conclusion  The manufacturer does not contradict any of the dentist's premises. Eliminate.

Hope this helps.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

Dentist: Your products contain high quantities of sugar, which causes

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Dentist: Your products contain high quantities of sugar, which causes

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards