Statement Arguments Handbook by Ck – Download here
Important from CAT CET and other exams point of view. This can come in Critical Reasoning or Reading Comprehension.
Here are a few benefit/drawback arguments:
1. Inexperienced workers are willing to take jobs with lower pay and fewer benefits. So, FantasyCorp should exclusively hire new workers with little experience.
2. Regular exercise reduces the risk of heart disease. To protect my heart, I exercise for three hours every day.
3. Certain chemical pesticides leave a residue on the leaves of plants treated with them. This pesticide residue is known to kill caterpillars that harmlessly feed on fallen leaves, ensuring that they never mature into butterflies. If farmers in eutopia continue using chemical pesticides on their crops rather than alternative methods of pest control, they will inevitably decimate the butterfly population in the area.
In the first two arguments, the author promotes a plan. In the third argument, the author predicts negative consequences. In Critical Reasoning arguments, the author is never 100% correct: if he or she is promoting the plan, then there’s probably a hidden drawback. If he or she disagrees with the plan, there may be a hidden benefit, or perhaps one of the author’s claims about drawbacks will turn out to be irrelevant.
1. One drawback to hiring inexperienced workers is that they’re likely to do their jobs poorly.
2. The second argument is a little more complex. Here are two possible drawbacks: think of them as two possible answers to a Weaken the Argument question.
Wrong: Exercising for three hours a day is time-consuming, making it difficult to keep a job or pursue other hobbies.
Right: Exercising for more than ten hours each week has been shown to cause lasting damage to heart muscle.
Only the second option is an acceptable CAT answer.
On the CAT, you have to address the conclusion exactly as it’s written. It says, specifically, that the author exercises to protect his heart. A drawback will have to show that exercising that much might not actually keep his heart healthy.
3. In the third argument, the author predicts that the farmers’ use of pesticides will have a specific negative consequence. To prove him wrong, you’d have to show that the butterfly population might not suffer: either by finding a hidden benefit that outweighs the drawbacks, or by proving his claims about drawbacks incorrect.
Wrong: Butterflies have been shown to harm many common crops.
Right: Most chemical pesticides, including the ones commonly used in eutopia, are actually harmless to caterpillars.
The conclusion doesn’t say “we shouldn’t decimate the butterfly population,” even though the author probably does believe that! The conclusion claims that “using chemical pesticides will decimate the butterfly population.” Only the second option given above actually addresses that claim.
Now, imagine seeing these arguments in a Strengthen the Argument problem. Do the reverse of what we’ve already done: add an additional benefit or drawback, or address the relevance of one that’s already given. The following statements all strengthen these cost/benefit arguments.
1. Inexperienced workers are generally more careful with their work, and have fewer bad habits.
A cost-benefit analysis has shown that the cost of training and supervising inexperienced workers is significantly less than the loss accrued due to paying higher salaries to more senior workers.
2. The heart-protective effects of exercise increase in direct proportion to the amount of exercise performed.
Regular exercise also prevents the normal deleterious effects of aging on heart tissue.
3. The type of chemical pesticide commonly used in eutopia kills butterflies that happen to alight on crops that have been sprayed with it, as well as killing caterpillars that feed on these crops.
Farmers generally use harmful chemical pesticides on their crops in the springtime, which is the main feeding season for young caterpillars.
Work out how each of these facts would successfully strengthen the arguments above. Can you also think of some incorrect “strengtheners” that actually miss the point, similar to the incorrect “weakeners” provided earlier? Can you think of some assumptions that are being made in these arguments? (Think about benefits and drawbacks when you identify assumptions — if the author believes the plan is good, he or she is assuming that it lacks major drawbacks.) If you can, then you understand the benefit/drawback argument type.
When you notice one arguement, remember to identify the specific conclusion, steer clear of tempting “real world” answers, and think about adding, removing, supporting, or disagreeing with benefits and drawbacks. The next time you see one of these arguments, predict some possible right answers before you check the answer choices. You may surprise yourself with your accuracy!
