Trucker: The new law will cause the entire transportation industry to

Question

Trucker: The new law will cause the entire transportation industry to shrink. It requires the installation of fire extinguishers and shatter-proof glass in all trucks and has cost truckers nationwide billions of dollars. This led us to bring up our prices, which reduced the number of our clients.

Businessman: Businesses will just opt for other methods of transportation such as small commercial vehicles, trains and boats.

The businessman responds to the trucker by

Businessman: Businesses will just opt for other methods of transportation such as small commercial vehicles, trains and boats.

The businessman responds to the trucker by

A. suggesting that the trucker's argument overlooks an alleviating factor

B. supporting the trucker's conclusion but disputing her underlying assumption

C. challenging the validity of the evidence the trucker cites as the basis for the conclusion

D. reinforcing the trucker's conclusion by complementing the picture with further evidence

E. implying that the trucker's conclusion is based on false premises

This is a  CR Butler Question

Check the links to other Butler Projects: 
 
   Data Sufficiency Butler 
   Problem Solving Butler  
   Sentence Correction Butler  
   Reading Comprehension Butler  
   Integrated Reasoning Butler

anur3811 · Answer

Businessman does neither challenges nor supports the argument. Answer has to be A.

assassinofkings98111 · Answer

What is the alleviating factor the question is referring to? The trucker already says that they will lose some clients because of the price increase

ParthPD · Answer

The businessman doesn't deny the fact that the truckers will lose their clients.
The conclusion of the argument is "The new law will cause the entire transportation industry to shrink."
The businessman's reply alleviates this conclusion by saying that the entire transportation industry will not shrink as businesses will opt for other methods of transportation.

assassinofkings98111 · Answer

Thanks, I totally missed the conclusion. This answer choice makes sense now

Bunuel · Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

Trucker: The new law will cause the entire transportation industry to shrink. It requires the installation of fire extinguishers and shatter-proof glass in all trucks and has cost truckers nationwide billions of dollars. This led us to bring up our prices, which reduced the number of our clients.

Businessman: Businesses will just opt for other methods of transportation such as small commercial vehicles, trains and boats.

The businessman responds to the trucker by

Businessman: Businesses will just opt for other methods of transportation such as small commercial vehicles, trains and boats.

The businessman responds to the trucker by

A. suggesting that the trucker's argument overlooks an alleviating factor

To answer this Dialog Analysis question, first break down the trucker's argument. The first sentence is a prediction, which is the trucker's conclusion; the next two sentences provide factual information (premises):

Premise: the requirements of the new law cost truckers billions of dollars
 +
Premise: this led truckers to raise prices and lose customers
 =
Conclusion: the new law will cause the transportation industry to shrink (i.e., less people and businesses will use transportation services)

Possible Assumption: trucks constitute the entire transportation industry

Next, break down the businessman's response:

(i) there are other kinds of transportation which will benefit from the truckers' misfortune

The businessman targets the trucker's assumption and suggests that the transportation industry will not shrink, just experience a shift from trucks to other means of transportation.

The businessman focuses on what the trucker assumed - that hindering the trucking industry will have a similar effect on the entire transportation industry. By showing that the clients will go to other service providers within the industry, the businessman suggest that the industry will not shrink, just shift internally.

B. supporting the trucker's conclusion but disputing her underlying assumption

Incorrect.

To answer this Dialog Analysis question, first break down the trucker's argument. The first sentence is a prediction, which is the trucker's conclusion; the next two sentences provide factual information (premises):

Premise: the requirements of the new law cost truckers billions of dollars
 +
Premise: this led truckers to raise prices and lose customers
 =
Conclusion: the new law will cause the transportation industry to shrink (i.e., less people and businesses will use transportation services)

Possible Assumption: trucks constitute the entire transportation industry

Next, break down the businessman's response:

(i) there are other kinds of transportation which will benefit from the truckers' misfortune

The businessman targets the trucker's assumption and suggests that the transportation industry will not shrink, just experience a shift from trucks to other means of transportation.

While the businessman disputes the trucker's underlying assumption, he does not support the trucker's conclusion. On the contrary - it can be inferred that the businessman believes the trucker's conclusion is incorrect and that the industry will not shrink.

C. challenging the validity of the evidence the trucker cites as the basis for the conclusion

Incorrect.

The businessman does not challenge the validity of the evidence the trucker cites. He agrees that the new law caused trucker to lose money and that this eventually caused them to lose clients. The difference between the businessman and the trucker is the conclusions at which they arrive based on the same evidence.

D. reinforcing the trucker's conclusion by complementing the picture with further evidence

Incorrect.

The businessman is indeed somewhat supportive of the trucker's plight, by implying that the truckers will lose business. If the trucker's conclusion had been that the new law will cause the trucking business to collapse, D would indeed have been the right answer. However, the trucker's conclusion goes too far in claiming that the entire transport industry will be hurt - a conclusion that is challenged by the businessman's point that some parts of the transportation business might actually benefit from the new law, namely the small commercial vehicle, trains and boats.

This is the reason it is important to first analyze the arguments presented and correctly identify and record the premises and conclusion. Focus on the argument as presented, not on the argument going on in your mind.

E. implying that the trucker's conclusion is based on false premises

Incorrect.

The businessman does not challenge the validity of the premises the trucker cites. He agrees that the new law caused trucker to lose money and that this eventually caused them to lose clients. The difference between the businessman and the trucker is the conclusions at which they arrive based on the same premises.

Trucker: The new law will cause the entire transportation industry to

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

Trucker: The new law will cause the entire transportation industry to

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