Letter to the editor: Middle-class families in wealthy nations are oft

Question

Letter to the editor: Middle-class families in wealthy nations are often criticized for the ecological damage resulting from their lifestyles. This criticism should not be taken too seriously, however, since its source is often a movie star or celebrity whose own lifestyle would, if widely adopted, destroy the environment and deplete our resources in a short time.

The reasoning in the letter to the editor is vulnerable to criticism in that it

(A) criticizes a characteristic of the people giving an argument rather than criticizing the argument itself

(B) takes failure to act consistently with a belief as an indication of the sincerity with which that belief is held

(C) presumes that a viewpoint must be unreasonable to accept simply because some of the grounds advanced to support it do not adequately do so

(D) fails to recognize that evidence advanced in support of a conclusion actually undermines that conclusion

(E) generalizes about the behavior of all people on the basis of the behavior of a few

LamboWalker · Answer

(A) criticizes a characteristic of the people giving an argument rather than criticizing the argument itself - Looks perfect. I almost want to pick this straight away but PoE is the way. Keep.

(B)  takes failure to act consistently with a belief as an indication of the sincerity with which that belief is held  Irrelevant.

(C)  presumes that a viewpoint must be unreasonable to accept simply because some of the grounds advanced to support it do not adequately do so  Nothing about any grounds in the argument. Eliminate.

(D)  fails to recognize that evidence advanced in support of a conclusion actually undermines that conclusion  The evidence doesn't undermine the conclusion.

(E)  generalizes about the behavior of all people on the basis of the behavior of a few  No generalization made.

infowarf · Answer

To sum up, the author says that because the claimer(s) is guilty him/herself the argument should not be taken seriously. Actually, the argument itself is not attacked or criticized. The flaw of the author's argument must be found. Pay attention that the stimuli must be taken as true, and the answers must go parallel to it.

A. exactly emphasizes the problem. The author criticizes celebrities lifestyle to make their point weak.

B. says that the author takes failure to act consistently, but there is no failure neither in the criticism nor in the counter argument. At least there is no evidence that the environmental damage is a type of failure. Secondly, there is no belief that acts sincerely, which supports the belief.

C. lack of support.  Tricky!  It says as if the author's point, which indicates that the criticism should not be taken too seriously is supported by the fact that the argument's ground is weak. However, this answer, despite may be true, criticizes the author's position instead of highlighting the flaw. One of the first rules when learning CR is that the author's viewpoint may never be judged. We may criticize the viewpoint of the mentioned characters or the cited materials.

D. there is no mention which conclusion is undermined by what evidence so it is too far fetched.

E. The author criticizes the argument based on the fact that the celebrities being guilty suggest how should live others. The additional fact that if everyone live so, the world would be in crisis is just a minor support but not the argument.

Hence, the correct answer choice is A. Hope this helps.

unraveled · Answer

Letter to the editor: Middle-class families in wealthy nations are often criticized for the ecological damage resulting from their lifestyles. This criticism should not be taken too seriously, however, since its source is often a movie star or celebrity whose own lifestyle would, if widely adopted, destroy the environment and deplete our resources in a short time.

The reasoning in the letter to the editor is vulnerable to criticism in that it

(A) criticizes a characteristic of the people giving an argument rather than criticizing the argument itself - CORRECT. POE helped. However, this is vague as an argument can be supported or offered with some reasoning that is against it. Not convincing enough.

(B) takes failure to act consistently with a belief as an indication of the sincerity with which that belief is held - WRONG. Irrelevant. But actually it is not understood what it is saying. The way i am reasoning for this choice is the way this choice is doing for the passage.

(C) presumes that a viewpoint must be unreasonable to accept simply  because some of the grounds advanced to support it do not adequately do so  - WRONG. The grounds actually do support. So, this is not right to say it didn't. Both middle class and movie stars lead to destruction of the environment and depletion of resources.

(D) fails to recognize that evidence advanced in support of a conclusion actually  undermines that conclusion  - WRONG. The words "not be taken too seriously" and "since" offer an explanation of the belief as presented in the conclusion.

(E)  generalizes  about the  behavior of all people  on the basis of the behavior of a few - WRONG. Neither generalizes nor all people.

Answer A.

KarishmaB · Answer

Context: Middle-class families in wealthy nations are often criticized for the ecological damage resulting from their lifestyles. Premises: Source of criticism is often a movie star or celebrity whose own lifestyle would, if widely adopted, destroy the environment and deplete our resources in a short time. Conclusion: This criticism should not be taken too seriously. What is the flaw in the reasoning here? The merits of the criticism are not discussed. The argument only focuses on the de-merits of the source of criticism. This is our error number VIII. Instead of evaluating the argument, an unrelated character could be evaluated. Here an unrelated character of the source is denounced. Let’s look at the options now. (A) Criticizes a characteristic of the people giving an argument rather than criticizing the argument itself Correct. It criticizes something about the people who are giving the argument, not the actual argument. (B) Takes failure to act consistently with a belief as an indication of the sincerity with which that belief is held Whether the movie stars hold that belief or not is not discussed or relevant. The point to be discussed is this: Are middle-class families in wealthy nations causing ecological damage from their lifestyles? The argument does not give any support against this and still concludes that the families should ignore the criticism. That is the flaw. Who brought this point forward and what their actual beliefs are cannot help us decide whether middle-class families in wealthy nations are causing ecological damage from their lifestyles. (C) Presumes that a viewpoint must be unreasonable to accept simply because some of the grounds advanced to support it do not adequately do so There are no grounds given to support the viewpoint that middle-class families in wealthy nations are causing ecological damage from their lifestyles. Whether they actually do support is then, beside the point. (D) Fails to recognize that evidence advanced in support of a conclusion actually undermines that conclusion No evidence given in support of the conclusion. Hence whether it actually supports or undermines is irrelevant. (E) Generalizes about the behavior of all people on the basis of the behavior of a few No such generalizations made from specific examples. Answer (A) Discussion on Flaw in Reasoning: https://youtu.be/3s0tWn3tiT8

Letter to the editor: Middle-class families in wealthy nations are oft

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Letter to the editor: Middle-class families in wealthy nations are oft

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards