Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: ZorWeaken

Medical Researcher: We recently concluded a six-month clinical trial of Cardioxil, a new medication for elevated blood pressure. Over the course of the trial, 75 percent of the participants experienced a significant decrease in their blood pressure. Furthermore, among the participants who experienced this decrease, the only reported side effect was occasional mild dizziness. Therefore, Cardioxil is highly effective at lowering blood pressure and presents no serious health risks to those who use it.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the medical researcher's argument?

  1. A
    In a separate control group that received a placebo instead of Cardioxil, the rate of occasional mild dizziness was identical to that of the experimental group.
  2. B
    Several other blood pressure medications currently on the market are equally effective as Cardioxil but do not cause occasional mild dizziness.
  3. Participants in the trial who did not experience a decrease in blood pressure suffered severe, life-threatening organ damage caused by Cardioxil.Cevap
  4. D
    Subsequent clinical trials have demonstrated that Cardioxil does not actually produce a significant decrease in blood pressure for the vast majority of patients.
  5. E
    Elevated blood pressure is typically caused by lifestyle factors, such as diet and lack of exercise, which Cardioxil is not designed to address.

Cevap

The option stating that participants who did not experience a decrease in blood pressure suffered severe, life-threatening organ damage.
The argument concludes that Cardioxil presents no serious health risks based solely on the side effects reported by the 75% of participants who experienced a decrease in blood pressure. This creates a critical logical gap by completely ignoring the side effects experienced by the remaining 25% of participants. The correct answer exploits this scope limitation by introducing new evidence that this omitted group suffered catastrophic, life-threatening organ damage. This directly targets the reasoning gap and demolishes the conclusion that the medication presents no serious health risks to its users.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the conclusion and the supporting premises of the argument.
Conclusion: Cardioxil is highly effective and presents no serious health risks. Premises: 75% experienced a decrease in blood pressure, and among those 75%, the only side effect was mild dizziness.
Deconstructing the argument is essential to finding the logical gap between the evidence and the conclusion.
2
Analyze the scope of the evidence provided in the premises.
The safety data provided is explicitly limited only to the 75% of participants who experienced a decrease in blood pressure.
Identifying limiting modifiers (like 'among the participants who...') often reveals the exact vulnerability in the reasoning.
3
Identify the logical gap in the researcher's reasoning.
The researcher generalizes that the drug is safe for all users based only on the subset of users for whom the drug was effective. The side effects for the other 25% are completely unaccounted for.
The correct answer to a Weaken question will typically exploit this exact gap by introducing new information about the ignored subset.
4
Evaluate the options to find the one that attacks this specific gap.
The correct option explicitly states that the remaining 25% suffered severe organ damage, directly falsifying the conclusion that there are no serious health risks.
This introduces new evidence that directly targets and destroys the argument's vulnerability without contradicting the original premises.

Anahtar Kavram

Scope Shifts and Selection Bias in Evidence
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Weaken

Bu konudan daha fazla soru