If the public library shared by the adjacent towns of Redville and Gle

Question

If the public library shared by the adjacent towns of Redville and Glenwood were relocated from the library’s current, overcrowded building in central Redville to a larger, available building in central Glenwood, the library would then be within walking distance of a larger number of library users. That is because there are many more people living in central Glenwood than in central Redville, and people generally will walk to the library only if it is located close to their homes.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) Many more people who currently walk to the library live in central Redville than in central Glenwood.

(B) The number of people living in central Glenwood who would use the library if it were located there is smaller than the number of people living in central Redville who currently use the library.

(C) The number of people using the public library would continue to increase steadily if the library were moved to Glenwood.

(D) Most of the people who currently either drive to the library or take public transportation to reach it would continue to do so if the library were moved to central Glenwood.

(E) Most of the people who currently walk to the library would remain library users if the library were relocated to central Glenwood.

Same passage with different stem question:  LINK

Bunuel · Accepted Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

(A) No. Since the library is currently in central Redville, it is reasonable to assume it is not within walking distance of people living in central Glenwood.

(B) Yes.  That fewer people would use the library in Glenwood implies that fewer library users are actually within walking distance of the library in Glenwood. You might object: There might be more people walking to the library in Glenwood even though overall fewer people use the library. This is a flaw in choice (B); nevertheless, choice (B) does weaken the argument and no other answer-choice does.

(C) No. This would strengthen the argument. That increasing numbers of people would use the library in Glenwood implies that more people are within walking distance of the library in Glenwood. Although the increased use of the library may be from people who commute, this does not weaken the argument.

(D) No. It is irrelevant whether those people who do not walk to the library would continue to use the library in its new location. The argument is concerned with increasing access to those people who walk to the library, not necessarily increasing the overall number of people who use the library.

(E) No. If these people continue to walk to the library’s new location, the argument would be greatly strengthened; and if they now commute to the new location, then this answer-choice would be irrelevant.

alexkozhura · Answer

Which option shows that moving the library from Redville (town A) to Glenwood (town B) would actually suck?

C ,  D  and  E  strengthen the argument instead of weakening it. They say: "Yes, move the library from town A to town B, nothing bad will happen."

A  kind of weakens the argument. But the fact there are now more people who currently live in town A than in town B who walk to the library doesn't tell us much. After the library changes its location to town B, many more people from town B could start walking to the library.

Only  B  weakens the argument sufficiently. It says: "Now there are (say) 1000 people in town A who walk to the library, but there are only (say) 5 people in town B who would walk to the library if we move it to town B. Therefore, don't move the library to the new place."

Desertchampion · Answer

(A) Many more people who currently walk to the library live in central Redville than in central Glenwood.
 This may seem like the correct answer, but let's dissect it a bit. If more people who currently walk to the library live in Redville than in Glenwood, this would leave room for change if the library were to move to Glenwood. Remember, the argument here is that the moving the library to Glenwood will give access to more people who will be walking distance.

(B) The number of people living in central Glenwood who would use the library if it were located there is smaller than the number of people living in central Redville who currently use the library.
 Bingo! This one clearly undermines the argument. If the number of people in Glenwood who would use the library is less than the number of people in Redville who currently use the library, then moving the library to Glenwood will not increase the number of people who use it.  This is our answer!
  
(C) The number of people using the public library would continue to increase steadily if the library were moved to Glenwood.
 This strengthens the argument.
 
(D) Most of the people who currently either drive to the library or take public transportation to reach it would continue to do so if the library were moved to central Glenwood.
 This strengthens the argument.

(E) Most of the people who currently walk to the library would remain library users if the library were relocated to central Glenwood.
 This strengthens the argument.

Please send kudos if this was helpful in any way!

Kukee · Answer

The question stem basically argues that the location of the library should be shifted as it would be much easier for the majority crowd to access the newly located library (Glenwood).
Hence,we need to find an option that suggest that even it would be at walking distance still many people won't come.

With just a glance,B does the same.

A is not given and we cannot assume so

B is correct
C is strengthening
D is absolutely irrelevant
E is strengthening.

I hope you understood.

unraveled · Answer

If the public library shared by the adjacent towns of Redville and Glenwood were relocated from the library’s current, overcrowded building in central Redville to a larger, available building in central Glenwood, the library would then be within walking distance of a larger number of library users. That is because there are many more people living in central Glenwood than in central Redville, and people generally will walk to the library only if it is located close to their homes.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A)  Many more people who currently walk to the library live in central Redville than  in central Glenwood. - WRONG. Present situation is of least importance. What may result upon shifting the library is more important.

(B) The  number of people living in central Glenwood who would use the library  if it were located there is  smaller than the number of people living in central Redville who currently use the library . - CORRECT. If the pool of people is small then conclusion is likely to falter.

(C) The number of people using the public library would continue to increase steadily if the library were moved to Glenwood. - WRONG. It sort of strengthens the conclusion but not the reasoning offered. Who these people are that would join the library? We are not sure about this.

(D) Most of the people  who currently either drive to the library or take public transportation  to reach it would continue to do so if the library were moved to central Glenwood. - WRONG. Irrelevant as scope shifts.

(E)  Most of the people who currently walk  to the library  would remain library users  if the library were relocated to central Glenwood. - WRONG. Remains neutral as large or small it can't established.

Answer B.

agrasan · Answer

Hi experts  DmitryFarber   GMATNinja   KarishmaB   MartyMurray ,

Option B = The number of people living in central Glenwood who would use the library if it were located there is smaller than the number of people living in central Redville who currently use the library.

I now understand why option A is wrong but eliminated option B and have two questions where I am stuck:

1. Number of walking people could still be higher in Central G once library is shifted as number of users = walking users + travelling users. Was an assumption (walking people won't change much) required to select option B? If yes then how can we assume as the fundamental method is to not make any assumption on your own.

2. Option B is comparing future situation of Central G once library is moved with the current situation of central R, what if future situation changes for Central R (after library shifts) like library users increase significantly? In this case, option B might become a Strengthener.
I think future situation with Central R is also given in the argument "That is because there are many more people living in central Glenwood than in central Redville...".

Please let me know your thoughts.

KarishmaB · Answer

Premises:

Many more people live in G than in R.
People generally will walk to the library only if it is located close to their homes

Conclusion:   
If the library is shifted from R to G, it will be within walking distance of a larger number of library users.

The main point is 'that it will be within walking distance of more users.'
Here is my problem - I see that G has more people, but does it have more users? What if very few people of G are library users? Perhaps 1000 people live in G but only 10 use the library. Perhaps 100 people live in R and all use the library. Then if we move it to G, will it be at walking distance to more users? No.

(A) Many more people who currently walk to the library live in central Redville than in central Glenwood.

Obviously this is so because the library is located in R and people walk only if it is close by. That is why many more R people walk to it right now. It doesn't weaken that if it is moved to G, more people will walk to it because there are more people in G.

(B) The number of people living in central Glenwood who would use the library if it were located there is smaller than the number of people living in central Redville who currently use the library.

People living in central G can walk to the library, not those in R if it moved to G. If the number of people of G who would use the library when it is in G is less than the R people who currently use the library, then it becomes less likely that number of walkers will increase. All users may not be walkers, but fewer users means the group capable of walking to the library is smaller. Hence the probability reduces. The argument is based on the fact that more people live in G. But the fact is that fewer library users (current and future) live in G. Hence we have weakened our argument - not disproved it, just weakened it.

Answer (B)

vfost906 · Answer

Hey is someone able to explain D and why it is wrong? I was thinking, If Most of the people who currently either drive to the library or take public transportation to reach it would continue to do so if the library were moved to central Glenwood, then does that not imply that there isn't going to be anybody walking to the library?

If the public library shared by the adjacent towns of Redville and Gle

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

If the public library shared by the adjacent towns of Redville and Gle

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