Economist: A symptom of the incipient decline of a society is its

Question

﻿Economist: A symptom of the incipient decline of a society is its inability to produce what its own citizens regard as necessary for a reasonably prosperous life. But when corporations in a given society extend their manufacturing operations to other countries, this is because of the greater profitability of producing the goods abroad, not because of any incapacity to produce the goods at home. Clearly, then, a society whose businesses enthusiastically embrace the outsourcing of its manufacturing operations is not beginning to decline.

The economist's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?

A. It assumes that the mere absence of one of the symptoms of social decline indicates that social decline is not occurring.
B. It fails to consider that what citizens consider necessary for a reasonably prosperous life differs from one country to another.
C. It takes for granted that the profits of overseas manufacturing operations are returned to the home country.
D. It assumes that a society within which many manufacturing operations cannot be performed profitably can still prosper economically.
E. It overlooks the possibility that economic factors are the principal contributors to the flourishing or decline of a society.

MartyMurray · Accepted Answer

﻿Economist: A symptom of the incipient decline of a society is its inability to produce what its own citizens regard as necessary for a reasonably prosperous life. But when corporations in a given society extend their manufacturing operations to other countries, this is because of the greater profitability of producing the goods abroad, not because of any incapacity to produce the goods at home. Clearly, then, a society whose businesses enthusiastically embrace the outsourcing of its manufacturing operations is not beginning to decline.

We see that the economist has concluded the following:

Clearly, then, a society whose businesses enthusiastically embrace the outsourcing of its manufacturing operations is not beginning to decline.

The support for that conclusion is the following:

when corporations in a given society extend their manufacturing operations to other countries, this is because of the greater profitability of producing the goods abroad, not because of any incapacity to produce the goods at home

We see that the economist has reasoned that, since corporations that extend their manufacturing operations to other countries don't have "any incapacity to produce the goods at home," a society whose corporations outsource manufacturing operations is not beginning to decline.

The correct answer to the question will present grounds on which the economist's argument is vulnerable to criticism. In other words, the correct answer will point out a flaw in the argument.

A. It assumes that the mere absence of one of the symptoms of social decline indicates that social decline is not occurring.

The economist begins by saying that a society's "inability to produce what its own citizens regard as necessary for a reasonably prosperous life" is "a symptom of the incipient decline" of the society. So, the economist implies that such an "inability to produce" is just one possible symptom among multiple possible symptoms.

Then, the economist offers as evidence that "when corporations in a given society extend their manufacturing operations to other countries, this is because of the greater profitability of producing the goods abroad, not because of any incapacity to produce the goods at home."

Notice that that evidence involves only the one symptom of decline mentioned in the first sentence of the passage, "inability" or "incapacity" to produce. Any other symptoms of decline of a society are not considered.

Then, having considered that one symptom of decline, the economist arrives at the conclusion "a society whose businesses enthusiastically embrace the outsourcing of its manufacturing operations is not beginning to decline."

We see that the economist has jumped from the idea that one symptom of decline is not present to the conclusion that there is no decline. In doing so, the economist has failed to consider that it's possible that, in the given society there are other symptoms of decline and and, thus, that even though the society may not have an "inability to produce what its own citizens regard as necessary for a reasonably prosperous life," it may still be in decline.

So, we see that, as this choice says, in arriving at the conclusion, the economist has assumed that the absence of one of the symptoms of social decline, "inability to produce," indicates that social decline is not occurring.

Keep.

B. It fails to consider that what citizens consider necessary for a reasonably prosperous life differs from one country to another.

Notice that the support for the conclusion is simply that corporations that extend their manufacturing operations to other countries don't have "any incapacity to produce the goods at home." In other words, the economist's point is that corporations outsourcing operations does not indicate that a society has the "inability to produce what its own citizens regard as necessary for a reasonably prosperous life" mentioned in the first sentence of the passage and thus does not indicate that a society has this "symptom of ... decline."

So, the argument doesn't need to consider specifically "what citizens consider necessary for a reasonably prosperous life" in a given country because the argument's support is the fact that this symptom of decline is not present, regardless of what citizens may consider necessary.

So, while it's true that the argument does not consider that what citizens consider necessary for a reasonably prosperous life differs from one country to another, it doesn't need to.

Eliminate.

C. It takes for granted that the profits of overseas manufacturing operations are returned to the home country.

This choice is tricky because it could be the case that, if a society's manufacturing operations are moved overseas and the profits of overseas manufacturing operations are NOT returned to the home country, then that society may go into decline.

At the same time, this argument is not about profits. It's about a society's ability or inability to "produce what its own citizens regard as necessary for a reasonably prosperous life."

The economist's point is that corporations that extend their manufacturing operations to other countries don't have "any incapacity to produce the goods at home." In other words, there's no inability to produce what citizens regard as necessary for a reasonably prosperous life.

That fact remains true regardless of whether profits of overseas manufacturing operations are NOT returned to the home country. So, as long as we go with the economist's narrow definition of when a society is in decline - when it has an inability to produce what its own citizens regard as necessary for a reasonably prosperous life - whether profits of overseas manufacturing operations are returned to the home country doesn't matter.

Eliminate.

D. It assumes that a society within which many manufacturing operations cannot be performed profitably can still prosper economically.

Notice that the argument does not say that "many manufacturing operations cannot be performed profitably" within the type of "given society" the argument is about.

Rather, the type of scenario the argument is about is one in which corporations "EXTEND their manufacturing operations to other countries" because of "GREATER profitability of producing the goods abroad."

So, the argument does not assume what this choice says it assumes because the "given society" the argument is about is not one within which "many manufacturing operations cannot be performed profitably."

Eliminate.

E. It overlooks the possibility that economic factors are the principal contributors to the flourishing or decline of a society.

This choice basically states the opposite of what the argument does.

The first sentence of the passage says, "A symptom of the incipient decline of a society is its inability to produce what its own citizens regard as necessary for a reasonably prosperous life."

Since a society's "inability to produce what its own citizens regard as necessary for a reasonably prosperous life" could be considered an economic factor and since the economist mentions that factor as "a symptom of the incipient decline of a society," we can say that the argument is BASED ON the idea that "economic factors are the principal contributors to the flourishing or decline of a society."

A choice that says that the argument does the opposite of what it does cannot describe a flaw in the argument.

Eliminate.

The correct answer is (A).

gmatophobia · Answer

Conclusion of the argument   : A society whose businesses enthusiastically embrace the outsourcing of its manufacturing operations is not beginning to decline.

The passage starts by introducing the symptoms of the decline of society. The author then introduces the idea of offshoring and states that corporations in a given society extend their manufacturing operations to other countries to obtain greater profitability by producing the goods abroad, not because of any incapacity to produce the goods at home.

The author thus concludes that such societies are not beginning to decline.

We have to find a flaw in the argument -

A. It assumes that the mere absence of one of the symptoms of social decline indicates that social decline is not occurring.

This is an inherent flaw in the conclusion that "  a society whose businesses enthusiastically embrace the outsourcing of its manufacturing operations  is not beginning to decline   ". The author just takes one aspect of society to reach a general conclusion of the society. In arriving at his conclusion the author has ignored other aspects which may be applicable to such societies and the presence of those aspects could indicate that social decline is occurring. Hence, we can keep this option.

B. It fails to consider that what citizens consider necessary for a reasonably prosperous life differs from one country to another.

This doesn't affect the conclusion of the author. The author concludes that social decline is not occurring merely because of the fact that businesses enthusiastically embrace the outsourcing of their manufacturing operations. The statement presented in Option B is not in line with the conclusion, hence doesn't present a flaw in the author's conclusion.

C. It takes for granted that the profits of overseas manufacturing operations are returned to the home country.

We have to find a flaw in the author's reasoning. This statement is out of scope and doesn't present a flaw. We can eliminate Option C.

D. It assumes that a society within which many manufacturing operations cannot be performed profitably can still prosper economically.

The information presented by this statement is not indicated in the argument. We are not presented with information related to the economic prosperity of the society and if citizens perceive economic prosperity as a necessity for a reasonably prosperous life. We can eliminate D.

E. It overlooks the possibility that economic factors are the principal contributors to the flourishing or decline of a society.

Similar to option D. We are not presented with information related to the economic prosperity of the society and if citizens perceive the economic prosperity of the society as a necessity for a reasonably prosperous life. Eliminate E.

Option A

av722 · Answer

Great explanation! While I understand why A is correct, I wanted to point out something I initially found confusing about the explanations for B and C in case anyone finds it helpful. In B you say  "the argument doesn't need to consider specifically 'what citizens consider necessary for a reasonably prosperous life'" . In C, you argue that " At the same time, this argument is not about profits. It's about a society's ability or inability to "produce what its own citizens regard as necessary for a reasonably prosperous life."  
I was confused about these two points-- why shouldn't we care about what citizens consider necessary for a reasonably prosperous life if the argument is about that?
But, I missed one important detail. The argument is about  society's ability or inability  to produce what its own citizens regard as necessary, NOT what it's citizens themselves regard as necessary. That's why B is wrong.

Highlighted the lines below for reference.

Dbrunik · Answer

This question is both a  Weakener  and a  Method of Reasoning 
 
does anybody have any links to questions similar to this one, being a mixture?

Raman109 · Answer

Economist: A symptom of the incipient decline of a society is its inability to produce what its own citizens regard as necessary for a reasonably prosperous life. - inability to produce whats necessary --> symptom of incipient decline of a society.

But when corporations in a given society extend their manufacturing operations to other countries, this is because of the greater profitability of producing the goods abroad, not because of any incapacity to produce the goods at home. - Outsourcing --> because of profitability and not inability.

Clearly, then, a society whose businesses enthusiastically embrace the outsourcing of its manufacturing operations is not beginning to decline. - outsourcing --> society is not declining. Why? Because Outsourcing --> because of profitability and not inability. And if not inability --> not a symptom of incipient decline of a society.

The economist's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?

A. It assumes that the mere absence of one of the symptoms of social decline indicates that social decline is not occurring. - Yes. It assumes that there is no inability as the outsourcing happens because of profitability and not inability, so no inability --> no decline in society.

B. It fails to consider that what citizens consider necessary for a reasonably prosperous life differs from one country to another. - Out of scope.

C. It takes for granted that the profits of overseas manufacturing operations are returned to the home country. - Out of scope.

D. It assumes that a society within which many manufacturing operations cannot be performed profitably can still prosper economically. - out of scope.

E. It overlooks the possibility that economic factors are the principal contributors to the flourishing or decline of a society. - First it considers the economic factors such as profitability. Secondly, its out of scope.

DmitryFarber · Answer

This is a Flaw question. They're much more common on the LSAT than on the GMAT, but they do show up from time to time. For instance, there are a few of them in the GMAT Official Advanced Questions book (for the old test). You can find them by searching CR for Flaw. Some of them also use "most vulnerable" like this one, but others with that phrasing are weakens. The difference is whether all the answer choices are new facts that might hurt the argument or whether (as here), some of them describe an assumption or error in the argument.

Dbrunik

This question is both a Weakener and a Method of Reasoning

does anybody have any links to questions similar to this one, being a mixture?

KarishmaB · Answer

Premises: Symptom of decline: A society is unable to produce what it needs for a good life. Corporations move production to other countries because they get more profit, not because they are unable to produce goods at home. Conclusion: A society whose businesses enthusiastically embrace the outsourcing of its manufacturing operations is not beginning to decline. The conclusion says that the society whose companies move production to other countries do so for higher profit. These societies are capable to producing the good at home. Hence this symptom of decline (unable to produce what it needs for a good life) is not present in these societies. Based on this the economist concludes that a society in which the businesses move manufacturing outside are not beginning to decline. But here is the problem - just because this symptom of decline is not present, it doesn't mean that the society is not declining. All we can conclude is that the symptom is not present. Can we conclude that the society is not declining? No. Hence (A) is correct. A. It assumes that the mere absence of one of the symptoms of social decline indicates that social decline is not occurring. B. It fails to consider that what citizens consider necessary for a reasonably prosperous life differs from one country to another. It does not. It clearly mentions "A society is unable to produce what it needs for a good life." C. It takes for granted that the profits of overseas manufacturing operations are returned to the home country. No discussion on where the profits go. Irrelevant. D. It assumes that a society within which many manufacturing operations cannot be performed profitably can still prosper economically. The argument does not say that "manufacturing operations cannot be performed profitably in the home country." It only says that profits are higher in other countries. Hence this is beyond the scope. E. It overlooks the possibility that economic factors are the principal contributors to the flourishing or decline of a society. It is discussing only one economic factor and it does not discuss " principal contributors". Hence irrelevant again. Answer (A) Here is another flaw in reasoning question: https://youtu.be/PXjBs1FOhzo

rahul5657 · Answer

The argument assumes that because outsourcing is motivated by profitability (not incapacity), it doesn't signal decline. But this ignores other ways outsourcing might relate to decline. For example:
If outsourcing leads to domestic incapacity over time (e.g., loss of skills, infrastructure), it could eventually cause the inability to produce necessities.
The argument assumes that the absence of one symptom (inability to produce) means no decline is happening, but decline could manifest in other ways.
Evaluating the Options:

A. It assumes that the mere absence of one of the symptoms of social decline indicates that social decline is not occurring.
 Correct . The argument concludes no decline is happening just because one symptom (inability to produce) isn't present. But decline could have other symptoms or this symptom could emerge later due to outsourcing.

B. It fails to consider that what citizens consider necessary for a reasonably prosperous life differs from one country to another.
Irrelevant. The argument is about a given society's citizens, not comparisons between countries.

C. It takes for granted that the profits of overseas manufacturing operations are returned to the home country.
Not directly relevant. The argument doesn't rely on where profits go; it's about the reason for outsourcing (profitability vs. incapacity).

D. It assumes that a society within which many manufacturing operations cannot be performed profitably can still prosper economically.
Not the main flaw. The argument is about outsourcing being profitable, not about whether unprofitable domestic production is compatible with prosperity.

E. It overlooks the possibility that economic factors are the principal contributors to the flourishing or decline of a society.
Not correct. The argument is focused on economic factors (profitability), so it doesn't overlook them.

haneenk15 · Answer

I THINK THIS IS A FLAW IN THE ARGUMENT QUESTION AND NOT WEAKEN THE ARGUMENT AS THE ARGUMENT SOUNDS WEAK BY ITSELF.

shreyans4757583 · Answer

Premise - Economist: A symptom of the incipient decline of a society is its inability to produce what its own citizens regard as necessary for a reasonably prosperous life. But when corporations in a given society extend their manufacturing operations to other countries, this is because of the greater profitability of producing the goods abroad, not because of any incapacity to produce the goods at home.

Conclusion - Clearly, then, a society whose businesses enthusiastically embrace the outsourcing of its manufacturing operations is not beginning to decline.

Argument Breakdown - One signal that predicts a bad state of the society is the inability of that society to produce what the citizens require for their very basic needs like food, clothes and buildings. But, the economist then claims that a society which outsources their production operations outside just for profit is not due to any inability producing goods which doesn’t signal the beginning of a bad state. Then the economist concludes that thus a society in which businesses enthusiastically embrace outsourcing is not beginning to decline.

Gap Analysis

1) There might be other reasons which actually contribute to decline which might be at play when businesses are outsourcing enthusiastically.
2) Outsourcing enthusiastically overtime might actually lead to the path where the society is not actually able to produce their own goods, so it might actually be beginning to decline. This gap is a bit of a stretch. I am open to discussion in the replies.

The economist's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?

A. It assumes that the mere absence of one of the symptoms of social decline indicates that social decline is not occurring.

- Perfectly correct as mentioned in the first gap. There might be a hundred other reasons for a society to decline, but just because one is not present doesn’t mean others are too. In short the conclusion is a very broad claim.

B. It fails to consider that what citizens consider necessary for a reasonably prosperous life differs from one country to another.

- But even if the criteria is different, if the ability to produce them isn’t declining then there is no sign of the beginning of the decline.

C. It takes for granted that the profits of overseas manufacturing operations are returned to the home country.

- no, this is nowhere mentioned.

D. It assumes that a society within which many manufacturing operations cannot be performed profitably can still prosper economically.

- No this is not an assumption. There are many other sectors in a society like secondary and tertiary. Also this is completely irrelevant to the conclusion.

E. It overlooks the possibility that economic factors are the principal contributors to the flourishing or decline of a society.

- This is a tricky option, but this is kind of exactly opposite to the first sentence, because the argument is based on the relationship that inability of a society to produce required goods for itself is a sign of beginning of the decline.

Economist: A symptom of the incipient decline of a society is its

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

Economist: A symptom of the incipient decline of a society is its

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