Official Explanation:
The manager of the HACFIX company, which fixes air conditioners in the Sulk City area, has expressed concern that recent positive trends in the local economy that has been in recession for two years will not actually help her business. Though most homeowners have more disposable income than they did a year ago, she believes that most of these people will choose not to spend their money because of a fear that the economy will take another downturn soon or will spend the money on a new air conditioner rather than getting the old one fixed.
Which of the following, if true, most weakens the manager's reasoning?
A. The air conditioner repair business in Sulk City has remained steady throughout the recession.
B. HACFIX depends on the repair of water heaters for about half of its income.
C. Most homeowners with failing air conditioners in Sulk City have been waiting for the economy to improve to get the repair work done.
D. Most homeowners in the Sulk City area are aware of the recent positive trends in the economy.
E. A new ordinance in Sulk City requires that all new air conditioners work more efficiently than any of the air conditioners that were available four years ago.
Question Type: Weaken
Boil It Down: Due to an economic recession over the past two years, the manager of HACFIX believes people will either not buy an air conditioner at all or opt to get a new one, instead of spending the extra money to fix their old one.
Goal: Find the option that would best weaken the manager’s argument that people don’t want to spend money to repair their old air conditioner, even if they now have more money than they did during the recession.
Analysis:
General comments about weakeners:
Broadly speaking, most arguments that deal with weakeners have issues related to relevance, where the purported evidence or premises are not completely relevant to the conclusion. Correct answer choices will expose this irrelevance.
Thinking about this visually, the correct answer will pull the connection between the premise(s) and conclusion apart, thereby weakening the argument.
For weakeners, there are three common ways to expose the irrelevance of the premises i.e. weaken an argument:
Mismatched terms: the conclusion introduces terms or concepts not in the premises
Counterexamples/objections: an example where the premises can be true, yet the conclusion does not follow
Overlooked possibilities/unintended consequences: An additional factor, possibility, or consequence that the argument did not consider
Now that we have a better idea of how to tackle this question, let’s look at how this particular argument is structured:
Argument structure:
(P) = Premise/Evidence/Support (C) = Conclusion
P1: Homeowners will have more disposable income
(Manager’s assumption. Homeowners will save their money, or they will buy new air conditioners (rather than fix old ones))
C: Whether homeowners save their money or buy new air conditioners, the increase in disposable income will not help HACFIX’s business
Unlike most weakeners, this argument states the assumption that links the premise(s) to the conclusion. The manager assumes that homeowners will either save their money or will buy new air conditioners. Therefore, despite the increase in disposable income in Sulk City, HACFIX’s business will not improve. Weakeners will attack this assumption, thereby weakening the link between premise and conclusion, thereby weakening the argument.
Be careful: normally for CR questions we should assume the premises given in the argument are true. Questioning a premise is never the correct answer. However, in this case, the manager is not providing evidence. Rather, she is providing an assumption. As with any weakener, we can question the assumption by showing that there is a mismatch in terms, a counterexample, or an overlooked possibility. For this question, the correct answer will point out an overlooked possibility.
Alternatively, we can think of the argument attempting to link two different concepts: 1. the premise related to homeowners having more disposable income with 2. the conclusion related to HACFIX’s business not being helped. Correct answers must attack this attempted link whereas incorrect answers will fail to address one or both of these concepts.
A. The air conditioner repair business in Sulk City has remained steady throughout the recession.
Incorrect. The manager’s argument claims that business will not improve. Answer choice A says that the air conditioner repair business has remained steady. Therefore, if anything, this answer choice strengthens the manager’s argument.
B. HACFIX depends on the repair of water heaters for about half of its income.
Incorrect. The fact that HACIFIX gets half of its income from water heater repair does not affect the manager’s assumption that homeowners will be saving their money, and the stimulus provides no information about water heaters. Therefore, answer choice B is irrelevant.
C. Most homeowners with failing air conditioners in Sulk City have been waiting for the economy to improve to get the repair work done.
Correct. The fact that most homeowners with failing air conditioners in Sulk City have been waiting for the economy to improve to get repair work done serves as an overlooked possibility in the manager’s assumption. Therefore, her assumption has been undermined. It is not the case that homeowners will buy new air conditioners or will save their money. Given that her assumption linked the premise to the conclusion, if her assumption is undermined, her argument is undermined i.e. weakened.
D. Most homeowners in the Sulk City area are aware of the recent positive trends in the economy.
Incorrect. The awareness of the homeowners regarding trends in the economy fails to affect the manager’s assumption, and it fails to attack the link made in the argument between more disposable income and a lack of improvement in business. Therefore, answer choice D is irrelevant.
E. A new ordinance in Sulk City requires that all new air conditioners work more efficiently than any of the air conditioners that were available four years ago.
Incorrect. This answer choice is related to air conditioner efficiency. The key pieces of the argument; its premise related to an increase in disposable income, its assumption related to saving money or buying new air conditioners, and its conclusion related to a lack of improvement in business has nothing to do with efficiency. Therefore, answer choice E is irrelevant.
Key Takeaway:
Find the key assumption. Weakeners will often attack this assumption. In this question, the correct answer weakened the assumption that homeowners will be saving money or buying new appliances. It did so by pointing out an overlooked possibility on the manager’s part.
Don’t study for the GMAT. Train for it.