Critical Reasoning: Conclusion Weakening Questions
Polystyrene egg containers are created by the injection of polymers and gaseous compounds into a mold at high pressure. The gases in the final form are released upon destruction of the object and are harmful to the earth's ozone layer. Therefore, cardboard egg containers are better for the earth's ecology than polystyrene ones.
Which of the following, if true, undermines the author's conclusion?
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]This answer choice neither weakens nor strengthens the conclusion. The argument focuses on choosing between two options: cardboard egg containers vs. polystyrene egg containers. The fact that some countries use neither is irrelevant since it doesn't get us any closer to weakening the conclusion that cardboard egg packaging is less harmful to the environment than polystyrene packaging.
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]This answer choice emphasizes the problematic condition of the ozone layer, and therefore strengthens the conclusion that cardboard egg containers are better for the environment than polystyrene ones (which damage the ozone layer). However, you were supposed to weaken the conclusion.
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]This answer choice neither weakens nor strengthens the conclusion; it simply goes into further detail about the injection molding process, but this does nothing to weaken the author's claim that cardboard egg containers are better for the environment.
Incorrect.
[[snippet]]This answer choice neither weakens nor strengthens the conclusion. It simply broadens our knowledge about the world's progress in stopping ozone destruction, but this does nothing to weaken the author's claim that cardboard egg containers are better for the environment.
Great!
[[snippet]]This answer choice attacks the argument's assumption that cardboard containers have no negative effect on the environment. It does so by describing the destructive qualities of such containers, thereby weakening the author's conclusion that they are better for the environment.
