Rachel: The legal drinking age in America should remain at 21, because

I vote for C.

The answer is not A because drinking responsibly is already mentioned in the passage.

Posted from my mobile device

Exactly the responsibility factor is mentioned but if you notice carefully it is for 18 years

We are inherently assuming that 21 years is a responsible age.

And same is assumed by Rachel as well.

Apart from that the whole argument by both the debators hinges on the responsibility only as per me.

I'll go for A .

Rachal argument is based on the age when one drink responsibly .
Other statement is additional premise to support why the age should not be decreased.

I dont know.I am still veering towards C because negating C breaks the argument.Also,in my view,the first statement of rachels argument and option A are pretty similar

Posted from my mobile device

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION:

A. Rachel argues for retaining the current legal drinking age of 21. She bases her conclusion on the premises that younger drinkers are more likely to influence the behavior of 15- to 17-year-olds and that teens haven’t reached an age where they can drink alcohol responsibly.

To find the correct answer to questions that ask for an assumption, look for the answer choice that links one or more of the premises to the conclusion. Eliminate answer choices that don’t relate to at least one of the premises of the argument.

Choices (B) and (E) relate to one of Mackenzie’s premises, so it’s unlikely that they would reveal one of Rachel’s assumptions. Cross out those two answers on your noteboard.

You can also check off Choice (D) because it contradicts Rachel’s premise that the effect an 18-year-old’s alcohol consumption can have on younger peers is an important consideration in determining the legal drinking age. It’s also unlikely that Choice (C) is correct because Rachel doesn’t make comparisons regarding the impressionability of teens based on their ages. Her premise is that younger teens are more likely to be influenced by 18-year-olds than 21-year-olds. Furthermore, Choice (C) doesn’t link one of Rachel’s premises to her conclusion in the way that Choice (A) does.

If Rachel concludes that the legal drinking age must remain at 21 because younger drinkers don’t consume alcohol responsibly, she must think that 21-year-olds have achieved some level of responsibility that’s greater than those who are younger. Choice (A) links the relevance of one of Rachel’s premises (a lower level of responsible drinking) to her conclusion that people who are younger than 21 shouldn’t be able to legally consume alcohol. So the correct answer is Choice (A).

I had chosen option E as my answer. I think I understand where I went wrong but please do help check my understanding.

E says alcohol drinking in private environment more dangerous than in public environment . However, the premise does not tell us the degree of level of danger consuming alcohol in private environment compared to in consuming alcohol in public environment. That is the reason why option E is wrong.

i feel too that option A is a restatement of the premise................. Option C is better among the rest

I go for A because I eliminate other options as below

(A) Those who have reached the age of 21 are able to consume alcohol more responsibly than those who are 18.
--> This is actually the assumption that the argument is based on. Try to negate it, we will have "Those who have reached the age of 21 are NOT able to consume alcohol more responsibly than those who are 18". This statement will hurt the argument conclusion. So this is CORRECT.

(B) When European teenagers consume alcohol, they do so in public, controlled environments.
--> The first argument does not mention about European teenagers. So this is out of scope

(C) Teens who are 15 to 17 years old are more impressionable than those who are aged 18 or older.
--> We have nothing to do when comparing the impressionability. This is irrelevant.

(D) The impressionability of one’s actions on others should not be a consideration when deciding the legal age to consume alcohol.
--> Again irrelevant with impressionability.

(E) Consuming alcohol in private, uncontrolled environments is not more dangerous than consuming alcohol in more public environments, such as bars or restaurants.
--> Irrelevant to compare the danger of drinking in private place to public place.

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.