Critical Reasoning (CR) | Re: A rare disease, malicitis, is being diagnosed with increasing frequenc

The argument concludes that the government should allocate more funds. And we have to find four those weaken and leave the one that doesn't weaken - that's our answer. This left-out option can be a strengthener or out of scope or distortion or anything but a weakener.

Option Elimionation -

A. funds already available for research in malicitis are currently under-utilized - Why do we need more if the current funds are underutilized? Weakens. That is not our answer.
B. a new test employed for the first time this year detects malicitis at a considerably earlier stage in the development of the disease - Two ways to look at it.
1. If this year we already have developed a technology to identify, then it can identify cases at a very early stage. We are already making progress, so why do we need more funds?
2. OK, if you say we still need funds. Then let's look at it from the point of view that the new test may have highlighted more cases that were earlier not counted because there was no
...

Statistics : Posted by Raman109 • on 28 Oct 2014, 05:08 • Replies 18 • Views 14154

---