- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8950
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Sat Jan 21, 2012 12:00 am
#36497
Complete Question Explanation
Weaken. The correct answer choice is (C)
People who suffer from high levels of anxiety can be treated with either long-term or short-term
relaxation training. Recipients of both forms of treatments are relieved of their symptoms of anxiety
within the period of time that the short-term training takes. Thus, the author concludes, for most
people the longer term treatment, which usually costs more, is not warranted. The argument breaks
down as follows:
conclusion that for most people, the longer term treatment would be unwarranted. To do so, the right
answer choice will provide some new consideration that justifies the choice to use the long-term
relaxation training rather than short-term relaxation training.
In other words, the correct answer choice will probably either provide some previously unmentioned
detriment associated with the short term treatment, or some new benefit associated with the longer
term treatment that could warrant its use.
Answer choice (A): The relevant comparison in this case is between long and short term training,
and whether the longer term approach is generally unwarranted when compared with the short
term approach. The fact that there might be some symptomatic decrease without treatment does not
weaken the author’s conclusion, which is that the short term relaxation training approach appears to
be sufficient.
Answer choice (B): The author’s point is that since both approaches appear to bring relief within the
time it takes to complete the short term treatment, the longer term treatment is unwarranted. While
the author does mention that long term treatment is generally more expensive, this choice does not
weaken the author’s conclusion that for most people, the longer term approach is unwarranted.
Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice, providing a previously unmentioned
advantage that long term relaxation training has over short term training. If the long term trainees
are less likely to have recurring anxiety, this is certainly a strong selling point for the long term
approach.
Answer choice (D): The power to heal one’s own anxiety has nothing to do with the author’s
conclusion that for most people, the longer term relaxation treatment of anxiety is unwarranted
because the short term treatment seems to be sufficient.
Answer choice (E): Again, the author’s conclusion is that for most people, the long term relaxation
therapy approach is unwarranted, and we are seeking to weaken this argument. Since this answer
choice provides no additional reasons for choosing the longer term approach over the short term
approach, it cannot be the correct answer to this weaken question.
Weaken. The correct answer choice is (C)
People who suffer from high levels of anxiety can be treated with either long-term or short-term
relaxation training. Recipients of both forms of treatments are relieved of their symptoms of anxiety
within the period of time that the short-term training takes. Thus, the author concludes, for most
people the longer term treatment, which usually costs more, is not warranted. The argument breaks
down as follows:
- Premise: High anxiety can be treated with long-term or short-term relaxation training.
Premise: Both types of treatment relieve symptoms within the short-term period.
Conclusion: For most people, the longer and costlier treatment is unwarranted.
conclusion that for most people, the longer term treatment would be unwarranted. To do so, the right
answer choice will provide some new consideration that justifies the choice to use the long-term
relaxation training rather than short-term relaxation training.
In other words, the correct answer choice will probably either provide some previously unmentioned
detriment associated with the short term treatment, or some new benefit associated with the longer
term treatment that could warrant its use.
Answer choice (A): The relevant comparison in this case is between long and short term training,
and whether the longer term approach is generally unwarranted when compared with the short
term approach. The fact that there might be some symptomatic decrease without treatment does not
weaken the author’s conclusion, which is that the short term relaxation training approach appears to
be sufficient.
Answer choice (B): The author’s point is that since both approaches appear to bring relief within the
time it takes to complete the short term treatment, the longer term treatment is unwarranted. While
the author does mention that long term treatment is generally more expensive, this choice does not
weaken the author’s conclusion that for most people, the longer term approach is unwarranted.
Answer choice (C): This is the correct answer choice, providing a previously unmentioned
advantage that long term relaxation training has over short term training. If the long term trainees
are less likely to have recurring anxiety, this is certainly a strong selling point for the long term
approach.
Answer choice (D): The power to heal one’s own anxiety has nothing to do with the author’s
conclusion that for most people, the longer term relaxation treatment of anxiety is unwarranted
because the short term treatment seems to be sufficient.
Answer choice (E): Again, the author’s conclusion is that for most people, the long term relaxation
therapy approach is unwarranted, and we are seeking to weaken this argument. Since this answer
choice provides no additional reasons for choosing the longer term approach over the short term
approach, it cannot be the correct answer to this weaken question.
