The Purpose of Weaken Questions
"Make the conclusion less likely to be true."Conclusion - "No reason to work if work pays the same as not working." The argument is comparing working v/s being unemployed
The FALSE COMPARISON Trap
You compared: Both options vs. Poverty line
You should have compared: Job vs. Unemployment
The Apple Example
You're choosing between two apples:Conclusion: "No reason to prefer one apple"
D says: "Both apples cost more than bananas"
You think: "Oh! They're both expensive! Maybe I should buy them!"
The problem: I'm not choosing between apples and BANANAS. I'm choosing between THE TWO APPLES.
Both apples STILL cost the same. Banana prices don't help me choose between the apples.
This is FALSE COMPARISON.C says: "Apple 2 gives you a free coupon 50% off next time you buy an apple"
You think: "Oh! Apple 2 is worth more!"
The result: NOW I have a reason to prefer Apple 2 over Apple 1.
This changes the comparison BETWEEN THE TWO OPTIONS.The two options:- Unemployment: $20K
- Job: $20K
Conclusion: "No reason to prefer the job"
D says: "Both are below poverty ($25K)"
Like the apple example: Both options are below poverty, but they're STILL EQUAL to each other. The poverty line doesn't make one better.
C says: "Jobs lead to better future jobs"
Like the apple coupon: NOW the job is worth MORE because of future benefits.
How to Avoid the FALSE COMPARISON Trap
The One Question:
"Does this make ONE OPTION better than THE OTHER OPTION?"D: Labels both options (doesn't make one better)
C: Adds value to one option (makes it better)
sumruethee
Hey, here’s how I interpret option D
amount received from the government assistant < Poverty Line. Thus, workers have an incentive to find employment so that they can rise about the poverty line.
This was the only reason I thought option is a better suited weakener.
Initially, I thought option C is a better option choice, but I thought it was a bit too broad and generic, so I rejected it.
Can someone help me in my analysis?
KarishmaB GMATNinja egmat