varotkorn
VeritasKarishma
As for (A): Processing regular coffee costs more than processing decaffeinated coffee.
The argument already tells us that processing decaffeinated coffee is not very costly ( which seems to say that it might be more expensive than processing regular coffee but not much). Option (A) says that processing regular coffee costs more. It doesn't seem to make much sense with our argument and that is what is meant by undermines the argument in the explanation.
Dear
VeritasKarishma,
By the way taking choice A. at face value, it strengthens the argument as AnthonyRitz suggested above right -
A is a slight strengthener if true.?
Thank you for resolving the paradox!
If option (A) and the conclusion are taken in isolation, then option (A) would strengthen it a bit though note that since the argument already gives you that the processing doesn't add much to the extra cost, we know the extra cost is coming from somewhere else. Now how much is extra is not the point of the argument. So how low is the processing cost doesn't matter much.