Verbal Diagnostic Test No : 6 – CR Q No: 12

The key here is to notice that causal arguments in general are susceptible to alternative causes. I initially chose A because a few words matched the stimulus, but that's never a good strategy -- too myopic. Option D is better because causal arguments are inherently weak to other causes (or different relationships). To answer this correctly, one must take a step back and analyze the line of reasoning in the argument.

A. presumes, without providing justification that only highly educated people make informed choices
- Wrong because of "only"

B. overlooks the possibility that people who make informed choices may nonetheless suffer from inherited vices
- 1) Neutral. Do inherited vices cause someone to not have optimism? Don't know. 2) Tangential to the argument.

C. presumes, without providing justification, that informed choices are available to everyone
- Weaken. Reverse logic. since Informed choices is sufficient condition, and high education is necessary condition, informed choices come from those who have high education.

D. overlooks the possibility that the some factors other than genetics and culture may causally contribute both to education and to high optimism
- Correct. Classic scenario

E. does not acknowledge that some people who fail to make informed choices exude high optimism
- Neutral. If those who don't make informed decisions exude high optimism may or may not be a significant number. Since it doesn't specify, this is a non-factor.

I don't agree with any of the answers here. We want to know what criticism the argument is "most vulnerable to". The argument says, essentially:

• education produces optimism
• therefore making informed choices produces optimism

That argument is 'most vulnerable to the criticism' that it doesn't make any sense. What does the first point have to do with the second? It's a simple non sequitur. It's not an argument at all unless there's a link between 'education' and 'informed choices', so I suppose I'd pick A here, because it addresses the most serious problem with the argument - a much more serious problem than that the argument ignores alternative causes. But it's just not a well-designed question.
_________________

Double post by accident. Please disregard.

I dont agree with D. Why can't 'cultural practices' cause both high optimism and education? why does the option say 'some factors other than genetics and culture may causally contribute'? I know there can be a third causal reason too for such correlations, and also that a correlation does not directly infer causal relation. but the phrase that i just stated makes it confusing.

Narrowed to B and D.

b-moderate
d-critic tone. criticize argument as a whole.

I don't understand how it can be D. The argument doesn't state that "genetics and culture may causally contribute both to education and to high optimism"

Is not the argument dismissing the belief stated in the first sentence?

Correlation can prove that:

1) factor 1 depends on factor 2
2) factor 2 depends on factor 1
3) factor 1 and 2 both depend on factor 3

D fits the 3rd case

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.
_________________