#19 - Productivity growth in industrialized nations has dropped substantially

[Adam Tyson]

I see a couple problems with A, Mazen, the first of which is that it only talks about an industry (a group) and tells us nothing about any particular business within that industry ( a part of that group). You might say that the argument has a whole-to-part flaw in it - the author takes what is true of a group and improperly infers that it must be true of every part of that group. We weaken the argument by showing that what is true of the whole might NOT be true of the parts, and answer A just doesn't do that.

Second, as far as the causal element goes, you're right that A brings in an alternate/additional cause, but the author isn't claiming that increasing reliance on technology is actively depressing their productivity, just that it isn't helping. In that sense, answer A could be seen as a strengthener, because it's saying that increased reliance is not leading to increased productivity because some other factor is counteracting any benefit it might have provided.

[averifoster1@gmail.com]

Hi,

I chose A, because I interpreted the "inefficiencies" as an alternative cause.

The stimulus posits a correlation between the heavy reliance on computer technology and productivity growth. Answer-choice A provides an alternative cause; it is not he heavy reliance on computer technology but rather the fact that these industries ran their operations inefficiently, too much overhead cost, overpaying, frivolous spending,...

I did not see A as linking the "burdening inefficiencies" to the computer technology. A the result, the correlation between reliance on computer technology and productivity growth is weakened by the correlation between inefficiencies and productivity.

But of course if the language in A is strong enough to imply that the inefficiencies are the intermediary cause in the chain between the reliance on computer technology and productivity growth, then A is out because I would strengthen, as opposed to what we're looking for to weaken the argument.

The only way for A to be wrong, in my mind, is for the inefficiencies to be caused by the heavy reliance on computer technology, but I do NOT feel that A conveys this causal relationship that the reliance on computer technology created inefficiencies that in turn lead to hindrance of productivity growth, which would have rendered A the incorrect answer because it would have strengthened the argument by tying closer together the correlation between productivity and computer technology.

Does A make it clear that the inefficiencies are those of the computer technology?

Or am I completely wrong with everything?

Respectfully,
Mazen

I picked A for this reason too, it really tripped me up.