#1 - Planting peach trees on their farm makes more sense for

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Weaken. The correct answer choice is (A)

The conclusion to this argument is the first sentence, that planting peach trees “makes more sense
for the Johnsons than planting apricot trees.” In support, the author tells us that both peaches and
apricots, when fresh and locally grown, are very popular in the area. Then, the author distinguishes
peaches from apricots, pointing out two ways that peach trees are the better investment. First, it
costs a lot less to purchase and plant peach trees than apricot trees. And, peach trees start to bear
fruit much sooner. So, the argument is that even though peaches and apricots are equally popular,
it costs a lot less in terms of time and money to bring peaches to market, making peaches the better
investment for the Johnsons.

Although the argument has the benefit of being fairly simple, it does not lend itself to a strong
prephrase. The question stem identifies this as a Weaken question, so we can say very generally
that the correct answer choice will show that it may not make more sense for the Johnsons to plant
peach trees than to plan apricot trees. There are many ways in which the correct answer choice could
do this, and we do not need to spend time trying to list out those possibilities. As you go through
the answer choices, simply be on the lookout for an answer that shows you, in any way, that the
Johnsons will be better off planting apricot trees.

Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice, because it shows one way the Johnsons
would be better off planting apricot trees. While it may cost less to buy and plant peach trees,
consumers are willing to pay a much higher price for apricots. While we do not have enough
information to decide whether planting peach trees or apricot trees is the better decision overall,
this fact gives the Johnsons more reason than they had before to consider planting apricots. So, it
undermines the conclusion.

Answer choice (B): This fact strengthens the conclusion that peach trees are the better option, since
peach trees begin bearing fruit at a younger age than apricot trees, and this information tells us peach
trees bear fruit longer than do apricot trees.

Answer choice (C): This answer choice shows a way in which peach and apricot trees are the same.
To undermine the conclusion, we need information that distinguishes the two by showing either a
relative positive of apricot trees or a relative negative of peach trees.

Answer choice (D): This answer choice has a promising start, telling us that the market for apricots
has grown in recent years. However, the rest of the choice suggests this market growth, which
resulted from increased awareness regarding the health benefits of eating “fresh fruit,” applies not
just to apricots, but rather to the market for fresh fruit generally, including peaches. Rather than
favorably distinguishing apricots from peaches, this choice, like answer choice (C), tells you a way
in which peaches and apricots are the same.

Answer choice (E): We do not have enough context to know what the impact of this information
would be. For example, we do not know how apricot production is doing in comparison, or the reason for the drop in peach production, etc. Without more information, we cannot know how this
answer choice would impact the conclusion.

[Arindom]

Hi,

The author's conclusion in the argument is that planting peach trees makes more sense for the Johnsons than planting apricot trees. The reasons are that both peach and apricot are popular locally and that peach trees cost much less to purchase and start bearing fruit at a much younger age.

I chose answer choice A because it directly challenges the contention of the author but i was also thinking about ans choice E for some time- that peach production has decreased dramatically. I didn't pick this answer because I thought maybe this is talking about peach production in a commercial sense. Am i right?

Thanks,
- Arindom

[Adam Tyson]

Good job picking A - it weakens because it makes the conclusion less likely (that peach trees are the better choice) by suggesting that there is an advantage to the alternative (more money in those apricots).

The problem with E has nothing to do with commercial production - it has to do with the complete unknown nature of the answer. Your reaction to E should be "so what?" Maybe that strengthens the conclusion, because there's a supply problem with peaches that you could fill by growing them? Maybe it weakens because it suggests that there has been reduced demand for peaches, so folks might not buy yours? Maybe it indicates a problem with peach trees, like a disease or pest problem? The problem is that there is just no way to know what impact that answer has on the argument without grasping for more information or making unwarranted assumptions about what it implies.

Think of it this way - you are thinking about growing peaches, and you consult a wise old oracle. "Oh wise Oracle", you ask, "should I grow peaches?" The Oracle ponders a while, and then says "peach production has decreased over the last decade." He then smiles gently, closes his ancient eyes and quietly fades into nonexistence, like Yoda, and you can ask no further questions.

Now, are you satisfied with the answer? Do you know what to do? Or are you left scratching your head and wondering where they old guy went and how you can get back the time you wasted coming to see him? Me, I'm scratching and wondering. That didn't help, didn't hurt, just confused, and that's why E is no good.

Hope that helps! You may consult the Oracles here again at any time.

[Arindom]

Adam - LOL!!! Thanks very much. The oracles here are superb!!

- Arindom

[angelica_mp]

Hi,

After reading the explanation provided I can see why A is correct, but I'm still a bit confused as to why my reasoning would be incorrect. My initial thought process for this answer was along the lines of " Even if apricots sell at a much higher price than peaches, that doesn't mean the Johnsons would be making a profit since peaches cost much less to purchase and plant that apricots. And since we don't know how much it costs to produce and plant apricots (although we know it's more than peaches), we can't say that the higher price tag will make them money".

I chose answer choice E, because I figured since peach production has decreased dramatically, that means people aren't buying as many peaches anymore, so the Johnsons wouldn't make as much of a profit.

Thanks!
Angelica

[Charlie Melman]

Hi Angelica,

Thanks for the question. First, let's start with the structure of the stimulus's reasoning. It basically says that peach trees make more sense because the benefits of planting peach trees and apricot trees is the same (where benefits = popularity = money to be made from selling), but the costs aren't. Because peach costs are lower than apricot costs, peach trees make more sense.

Now, the question stem doesn't ask us to refute the stimulus entirely. Instead, we just want to find the answer choice that weakens the stimulus's argument more than all the other answer choices.

Answer choice (A) weakens the stimulus a lot. It says, "wait a minute, that cost/benefit analysis in the stimulus is all wrong. It's wrong because the benefits are actually not equal. Instead, apricots yield greater benefits ($$$) than peaches." So now it's not clear at all that peaches are the right choice.

Answer choice (E) says nothing about costs or benefits. The issue with your reasoning is that the fact that peach production is on a downward trend doesn't tell us anything about the benefits of growing peaches. Maybe price is high because supply is low, and growing peaches could help you get in on those high prices. Or maybe your hypothesis is what's actually happening. We just don't know. Additionally, the stimulus talks about locally grown peaches and apricots, but answer choice (E) doesn't mention whether production has decreased locally.

Hope this helps!

[JNSIWL24]

Hi,
I understand why answer choice (a) is correct and now realize that the key item to notice in this question is that the conclusion statement is in the form of a comparison of two items, the peach trees and the apricot trees. This was the first time that I noticed this type of structure in a conclusion. I was wondering if you can provide a list of any other types of structures used to form conclusions? (For example,… must do something, …)

[Dana D]

Hello,

The first sentence is not the conclusion simply based on the comparison words used; it is the conclusion because the other sentences in the paragraph are offered in support of that idea. If you read that first sentence as a standalone idea, you'd probably ask why the author is so confident that planting peach trees makes more sense. Thus, to explain their reasoning, the author provides the following two sentences which provide reasoning for their conclusion.

Instead of relying on indicator words or phrases, think about conclusions and premises structurally like this, in terms of which ideas standalone as a main point or conclusion and which ideas are being offered to support this main point.

Consider the first paragraph I typed out - the conclusion of that paragraph was also in the first sentence. I could have just stopped there, but instead I offered premises to support why I was making that claim. If you look at that paragraph and rely on indicator words, you might be tempted to say the last sentence is the conclusion. After all, it is last, and it uses the word 'thus.' However, when we look at what that sentence is actually saying, we see that it is just further supporting my main point - that the first sentence in the test stimulus was the conclusion and the subsequent sentences were required to support it.

[JNSIWL24]

Hi Dana,
I see your point. I will determine the structure of the stimulus/argument, in terms of the premises and the conclusion going forward. Thanks for your quick response!