manjot123 wrote:
GMATNinja sir please explain why e and not a?
It looks like
0akshay0 and
niteshwaghray have identified why (E) is the best choice and why (A) doesn't do anything to weaken the argument. Nice work on this one!
I'll add a reminder that it's very important to clarify the conclusion that you're trying to weaken before you begin eliminating answer choices.
In this case, the author concludes that manufacturers should be allowed to label reduced-butterfat butter with the name "lite butter." The author implies that if the label change is allowed, then the public will stop avoiding reduced-butterfat butter. And once they start buying reduced-butterfat butter, they will be eating fewer foods with higher butterfat content.
Quote:
(E) Most people deterred from eating “imitation butter” because of its name choose alternatives with a lower butterfat content than this product has.
However, (E) introduces evidence that most people who are avoiding reduced-butterfat butter are in fact eating alternative foods with
lower butterfat content. Switching over to "lite butter" won't lead to a reduction in the consumption of higher butterfat foods. So if (E) is true, then the whole point of this conclusion turns out to be moot.
Quote:
(A) The manufacturers who prefer to use the word “lite” instead of “imitation” are motivated principally by the financial interest of their stock holders.
Choice (A), on the other hand, runs away from the point of this conclusion. We just spent precious moments of our lives reading about how butterfat content impacts the health of people who consume it. The conclusion focuses on the effect of a label change on consumer decisions about what butter to buy. Why, then, would we care about the motivations of butter manufacturers?
Well, we don't. That's why we eliminate (A).
aditliverpoolfc wrote:
What is wrong with answer choice C?
Quote:
(C) Some individuals who need to reduce their intake of cholesterol are not deterred from using the reduced-butterfat product by the negative connotations of the term "imitation."
This choice tells us that
some people who need to eat less cholesterol look at "imitation" butter and buy it anyway. So these people are already ending up where the author would like everyone to end up: eating reduced-butterfat butter.
This
sounds like it weakens the argument. But let's take one more look at that argument:
Quote:
Since the public should be encouraged to eat foods with lower rather than higher butterfat content and since the term “imitation” with its connotations of falsity deters many people from purchasing products so designated, manufactures who wish to give reduced-butterfat butter the more appealing name of “lite butter” should be allowed to do so.
OK, so:
- The argument tells us up front that the term "imitation" deters many people from buying "imitation" butter.
- Choice (C) tells us that the term "imitation" fails to deter some people from buying "imitation" butter.
Wait, what? Is choice (C) really telling us anything new? When we read closely, we see that (C) is really just re-phrasing part of the argument that we already know. And the conclusion is pointed at the
many people who have been deterred, not
some people who haven't been deterred.
If (C) is true, the argument isn't really affected at all. That's why it's a much poorer choice than (E).
On a more personal note, I hope all of this clarification didn't reduce your appetite for delicious, delicious butter. Especially clarified butter. Mmmmmmm, clarified butter...
_________________
GMAT/GRE/EA tutors @
www.gmatninja.com (
hiring!) |
YouTube |
Articles |
IG Beginners' Guides:
RC |
CR |
SC |
Complete Resource Compilations:
RC |
CR |
SC YouTube LIVE webinars:
all videos by topic +
24-hour marathon for UkraineQuestion Explanation Collections:
RC |
CR |
SC