Just as a bicycle chain may be too tight, so may one’s carefulness and

The stimulus presents an analogy that if the chain of a bike is too tight it may hinder the functioning of the bike and in the same way if someone's carefulness and conscientiousness is more tense than it may affect the way the mind works too.

Keeping this in mind we need to find an answer option that negates the reasoning shown in the analogy.

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

(A) Bicycle chains are used to turn wheels, but the human mind is used to “turn” ideas. (Irrelevant)
(B) People and bicycles are similar only in that both may not function well under stress. (This is not our answer as it gives another example of the same analogy.)
(C) Bicycles help people with transportation, but careful, conscientious thought helps to solve many different problems.(Irrelevant)
(D) Extreme tension helps a bicycle chain to function efficiently. (this is our OA, as this states that the extreme tension help the bicycle chain run smoothly, whereas, extreme tension will not let the human mind run smoothly.)
(E) People engage in poor reasoning whether they are careful and conscientious or not. (Irrelevant).

Just as a bicycle chain may be too tight, so may one???s carefulness and conscientiousness be so tense as to hinder the running of one???s mind.

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

(A) Bicycle chains are used to turn wheels, but the human mind is used to ???turn??? ideas.
(B) People and bicycles are similar only in that both may not function well under stress.
(C) Bicycles help people with transportation, but careful, conscientious thought helps to solve many different problems.
(D) Extreme tension helps a bicycle chain to function efficiently.
(E) People engage in poor reasoning whether they are careful and conscientious or not.

I have a confusion related to options E and D.

Option E =>
States that people have poor reasoning (i.e., mind not running smoothly), whether there is little or more carefulness and conscientiousness. Thus, the bicycle comparison becomes redundant.

Option D =>
Here, if "extreme tension" is considered as not "too tight", but "way too tight" because of the presence of "extreme". In that case, this argument has no effect - weaken or strengthen as it talks about a different case.

VeritasKarishma chetan2u

Is extreme tension within the scope of the argument?
How to eliminate option E?

This is not a GMAT type question so I will not worry too much about it.
Answer is (D) by elimination. Nothing else is relevant.

Bicycle chain may be too tight. Similarly, one's carefulness may be so tense as to hinder the running of mind.

So it is saying that the bicycle chain may be too tight and that could hinder the functioning of the bicycle. Similar thing could happen in the mind.

Option (D) says that extreme tension actually helps in better functioning in bicycle. So the entire logic of the comparison falls.

(A) Bicycle chains are used to turn wheels, but the human mind is used to “turn” ideas.

Doesn't harm the comparison. Whatever may be involved in the "functioning" of the bicycle and mind, it doesn't matter. The point being made is that too much tension hampers their functioning.

(B) People and bicycles are similar only in that both may not function well under stress.

The argument is not looking for any other similarities.

(C) Bicycles help people with transportation, but careful, conscientious thought helps to solve many different problems.

Again, the exact uses of the bicycle vs the mind are not being debated.

(E) People engage in poor reasoning whether they are careful and conscientious or not.

We cannot say that "poor reasoning" is the effect when running of one's mind is hindered. For example, the effect could be not being able to reason at all. Whether the reasoning is smart or poor could very well not be in the picture at all.
Also, even if no carefulness leads to poor reasoning, too much carefulness could lead to it too. So it doesn't weaken our conclusion.

Answer (D)

Just as a bicycle chain may be too tight, so may one’s carefulness and conscientiousness be so tense as to hinder the running of one’s mind.

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

(A) Bicycle chains are used to turn wheels, but the human mind is used to “turn” ideas. X
(B) People and bicycles are similar only in that both may not function well under stress. X
(C) Bicycles help people with transportation, but careful, conscientious thought helps to solve many different problems. X
(D) Extreme tension helps a bicycle chain to function efficiently. CORRECT.
The author is comparing a bike chain and the human mind. To weaken the argument, we need to show that this comparison is flawed. D) does just that because it shows that when the bike is 'tight'/tense it actually performs well, whereas the mind does poorly when it is 'tense'.
(E) People engage in poor reasoning whether they are careful and conscientious or not. X

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.