Smokers who switched to a low-tar, light or mild brand of cigarette wi

A. The first part provides evidence that, if correct, would weaken the main conclusion; the second is an explanation in support of main conclusion.
B. The first part is a prediction that, if correct, would support the main conclusion; the second is a conclusion drawn in order to support the main conclusion.
C. The first is a claim that has been advanced in support of a position that the argument opposes; the second is a claim advanced in support of the main conclusion of the argument.
D. The first is a finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is evidence presented in support of the main conclusion of the argument.
E. The first part is a presumption that, if correct, would weaken the main conclusion; the second provides evidence in support of the main conclusion. right
"smokers think"- presumption
"58% and 60% "- evidence in support of main conclusion that-smokers don't quit !

Does the first bold phrase actually weaken the main conclusion?
From my understanding the main conclusion is that smokers might find it harder to quit, so they probably never will. Now if A is true then it supports the conclusion because of they believe that a lighted brand is better for their health then they will in fact never quit.

Any other opinions around here?
Cheers
J

A. The first part provides evidence that, if correct, would weaken the main conclusion; the second is an explanation in support of main conclusion. --- Although the first statement, I feel is correct. But the second statement is not an explanation but hard evidence from a research that supports the main conclusion.
B. The first part is a prediction that, if correct, would support the main conclusion; the second is a conclusion drawn in order to support the main conclusion. --- Incorrect because the first statement- if correct would weaken the conclusion.
C. The first is a claim that has been advanced in support of a position that the argument opposes; the second is a claim advanced in support of the main conclusion of the argument. --- The second statement is not a claim but evidence of the research conducted.
D. The first is a finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is evidence presented in support of the main conclusion of the argument. ---- The first statement is not a finding. It is just an opinion of a smoker.
E. The first part is a presumption that, if correct, would weaken the main conclusion; the second provides evidence in support of the main conclusion. ---- CORRECT. The first statement is a presumption, because it basically gives an opinion of the smoker. The second statement provides evidence that strengthens the main conclusion of the argument.

A. The first part provides evidence that, if correct, would weaken the main conclusion; the second is an explanation in support of main conclusion. Incorrect. as the first part cannot be an evidence. No need to analyze further.
B. The first part is a prediction that, if correct, would support the main conclusion; the second is a conclusion drawn in order to support the main conclusion. Incorrect. The first statement cannot be a prediction as it is not supported with any facts or findings.
C. The first is a claim that has been advanced in support of a position that the argument opposes; the second is a claim advanced in support of the main conclusion of the argument. Incorrect. Again, the first part cannot be a claim. The phrase 'it may be' is not strong enough to be called a claim.
D. The first is a finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is evidence presented in support of the main conclusion of the argument. Incorrect. The first is not a finding.
E. The first part is a presumption that, if correct, would weaken the main conclusion; the second provides evidence in support of the main conclusion. Correct as the first statement clearly shows an opinion or assumption that the author has made.

Its between D and E.

It may be that smokers think that a lighter brand is better for their health and is therefore an acceptable alternative to giving up completely ---- its a believe or presumption,not an evidence. and it is opposed in the last sentence -----> Other research has shown that so-called low-tar cigarettes have just as much tar, nicotine and other compounds as regular cigarettes.---- ( more inclined towards D )

those who switched brands were 58% more likely to have tried to quit smoking than those who stuck with their brands. But they were 60% less likely to actually succeed in quitting.
its a fact or evidence. and it support to the argument ---> will not find it easier to quit

I will go with D.
what is the OA?

I first had trouble solving this question and finally now i understood why it is E and not D . B1 - tells us that the switch in the brand used for smoking can help quit the smoking habit. B2 - gives evidence that there is no such possibility.
So D says that the first is evaluated , But the result can be a yes or no. So the B2 can be either an supporting or weakening statement . So hence D cannot be the answer. Please let me know if my understanding is correct.

Smokers who switched to a low-tar, light or mild brand of cigarette will not find it easier to quit and in fact may find harder. It may be that smokers think that a lighter brand is better for their health and is therefore an acceptable alternative to giving up completely. As per a study conducted on 50,000 smokers, those who switched brands were 58% more likely to have tried to quit smoking than those who stuck with their brands. But they were 60% less likely to actually succeed in quitting. Other research has shown that so-called low-tar cigarettes have just as much tar, nicotine and other compounds as regular cigarettes.

In the above argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

B. The first part is a prediction that, if correct, would support the main conclusion; the second is a conclusion drawn in order to support the main conclusion.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Out of the blue and different from all other votes, B. is the option I contend for.

Main Conclusion- " Smokers who switched to a low-tar, light or mild brand of cigarette will not find it easier to quit and in fact may find harder." (Since main conclusion can never be a data reported as premise, the last sentence of premise is not the main conclusion, as possibly believed by many.)

If the BF1, a prediction, is correct, then smokers actually think that a lighter brand is better for their health and is therefore an acceptable alternative to giving up completely. This provides a strong support that the smokers are much less likely to quit smoking after switching to a lighter brand. In fact, the perception of "lighter brands are healthier" will make it harder for smokers to quit, thus supporting the main conclusion.

BF2- "those who switched brands were 58% more likely to have tried to quit smoking than those who stuck with their brands. But they were 60% less likely to actually succeed in quitting" - clearly drawn to support the main conclusion by providing statistical information about the relative ease of quitting among the two groups.

Great Question!!
_________________

Confused between B and E.
Isn't BF1 supporting the main conclusion(It may be that... giving a reason to support the conclusion). and E tells that if BF1 is true it would weaken the main conclusion. How does it weaken??
Please clarify my doubt.

[size=95]

mallya12 The problem with (B) is that it claims that the first bold face ("it may be that smokers think...") is a prediction, which it isn't. A belief/assumption is different that a prediction. Also, the second half is dead wrong. (E) is still a better choice of them all.




Our author concludes that smokers that switch to light brand cigarettes won't find it easier to quit. He then introduces the idea that smokers believe that switching is better for "their health and is therefore an acceptable alternative to giving up completely." He then moves on to another premise, which supports the main conclusion about the difficulty of quitting with research evidence ("As per a study conducted on 50,000 smokers...."). The last sentence refutes the smokers' belief that "a lighter brand is better for their health" with research evidence ("Other research has shown....has as much tar...as regular cigarettes"). This argument could honestly do just find without the second and last sentence. From our quick pre-think, we can see that we're looking for an answer choice that reflects the following idea: The first is an opinion of the smokers (that the author believes is false), the second is a study/evidence supporting the author's main conclusion (not related to the first).

In the above argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A. The first part provides evidence that, if correct, would weaken the main conclusion; the second is an explanation in support of main conclusion.
The first is not evidence but a belief of the smokers that switch to light brand cigarettes. The second is evidence....not so much "an explanation" supporting the main conclusion.

B. The first part is a prediction that, if correct, would support the main conclusion; the second is a conclusion drawn in order to support the main conclusion.
Is it a prediction? No, the author is merely sharing with us the opposing rationale. Also, it's not a prediction. A prediction should be: "This will happen....". The first bold face is merely an assumption the author makes about smokers who switch to lighter "healthier" cigarettes. Also, the second is EVIDENCE, not a conclusion.

C. The first is a claim that has been advanced in support of a position that the argument opposes; the second is a claim advanced in support of the main conclusion of the argument.
The first part is the author's claim....but it doesn't really support the position ("It's hard to quit even if you switch!"). And the argument doesn't oppose that position. Also, the second is evidence!


D. The first is a finding whose accuracy is evaluated in the argument; the second is evidence presented in support of the main conclusion of the argument.
The first is NOT a finding, but an opinion of the author.

E. The first part is a presumption that, if correct, would weaken the main conclusion; the second provides evidence in support of the main conclusion.
The first part is the author's presumption! Not a fan of this answer choice (probably why the source isn't LSAT or OG) but it's the best of the lot. Also, we can be certain that the second does provide evidence that supports the conclusion!
_________________

I fail to understand why the BF1, if true, would weaken the main conclusion.

Can someone pls explain how BF1 weakens the conclusion

main concl is that those who switching to lighter cig. will find it difficult to give up smoking
whereas BF1 explains why it may happen

Feels like B should be the correct answer.

How come E is a good answer as compare to B

Q:- Smokers who switched to a low-tar, light or mild brand of cigarette will not find it easier to quit and in fact may find harder. It may be that smokers think that a lighter brand is better for their health and is therefore an acceptable alternative to giving up completely. As per a study conducted on 50,000 smokers, those who switched brands were 58% more likely to have tried to quit smoking than those who stuck with their brands. But they were 60% less likely to actually succeed in quitting. Other research has shown that so-called low-tar cigarettes have just as much tar, nicotine and other compounds as regular cigarettes.


Please provide Ans explanation

Same here. Conclusion says (switching to light brand) make people herder to quit smoking; while BF1 is an explanation why those people are hard to quit, so it does NOT weaken.
Anybody can explain? Or offers OE?