Premise: More gym memberships are bought in Schwartz than in Talsberg.
Conclusion: Therefore, the citizens of Schwartz exercise more frequently than do the citizens of Talsberg.
We are to find the option that does NOT weaken (i.e., could support or be irrelevant to) this conclusion.
Let’s analyze each option:
A. Schwartz has a larger population than Talsberg does.
Effect: If Schwartz has a larger population, then more gym memberships overall might simply be due to more people, not necessarily because a higher percentage or frequency of people exercise more.
Does it weaken? Yes, because it shows the higher number of memberships doesn’t necessarily mean higher frequency of exercise per person.
Eliminated (because it weakens the conclusion)
B. Most citizens of Talsberg work in Schwartz and have memberships in gyms there.
Effect: This shows that many of the gym memberships counted in Schwartz are actually used by Talsberg residents.
Does it weaken? Yes, because the conclusion falsely attributes those memberships to Schwartz residents.
Eliminated (because it weakens the conclusion)
C. The average price of a gym membership is lower in Schwartz than it is in Talsberg.
Effect: If memberships are cheaper in Schwartz, people might buy them even if they don’t use them much — so higher number of memberships doesn’t guarantee more exercise.
Does it weaken? Yes, because it shows the number of memberships might be inflated due to cost, not exercise habits.
Eliminated (because it weakens the conclusion)
D. A large, free community gym open to all is available to the citizens of Talsberg.
Effect: This explains why fewer paid gym memberships are bought in Talsberg — people use the free gym.
Does it weaken? Yes, because it shows that Talsberg citizens may still be exercising frequently, just not through purchased gym memberships.
Eliminated (because it weakens the conclusion)
E. The average citizen of Schwartz spends less time at the gym per week than does the average citizen of Talsberg.
Effect: Directly contradicts the idea that Schwartz citizens exercise more frequently — they spend less time at the gym.
Does it weaken? Yes, because it shows less frequent or shorter exercise.
-> Eliminated (because it weakens the conclusion)
None of these options support the argument. But the question asks for the option that does NOT weaken it.
All 5 options weaken the argument in different ways — but the question is phrased as an EXCEPT question, so we need the one that least undermines the conclusion.
Reassessing for the LEAST WEAKENING option:
Let’s rank them in terms of weakening power:
B (Talsberg citizens own Schwartz memberships) →
Strongly weakensD (Free gym in Talsberg) →
Strongly weakensE (Less gym time in Schwartz) →
Strongly weakensC (Lower gym cost in Schwartz) →
Moderately weakensA (Larger population in Schwartz) →
Least weakeningEven though A does weaken slightly, it’s mostly a context fact — the number of memberships is a raw number, not normalized. But it doesn’t directly attack exercise frequency as clearly as B, D, E do.
✅ Correct Answer: A
Because it does not significantly weaken the conclusion, while the other options do.