Q17 - In order to determine automobile

[ramneet.sierra]

Hello there.

I'm having trouble with why the correct answer would be B instead of A.

I thought it was people who drive infrequently and are involved in more accidents in small roads does weaken the argument?

Please explain this one to me. I'm really not understanding why B is correct.

Thanks in advance!

[noah]

The conclusion of this argument is that insurance premiums should increase as someone drives more.

Why? It's because whatever your chance of having an accident, the more you drive, the more likely you'll have that chance accident occur. (In other words, if two people each have a 2% chance of having an accident each time you drive, the person who drives 100 times per year has a greater chance of actually having an accident by the end of the year than the person who drives only 10 times).

Makes good sense to me! But, since we're asked to weaken this question, we know there's some sort of gap.

My debate with this argument might sound like this: sure our accident chances might increase as we drive more in terms of the numbers, but what if driving more has a positive effect on your ability to avoid an accident - i.e. you get better at driving? Or, we could say, perhaps not driving a lot makes you rusty at operating a vehicle, and you now increase your chances.

This is the point that (B) plays upon. Those who drive less often are less like to follow the safe-driving rules. If that's true, that can easily overpower the statistics.

(A) is wrong because it's comparing where infrequent drivers are more likely to have an accident. We need a comparison between infrequent and frequent drivers, like (B) provides. For all we know, the facts in (A) also apply to frequent drivers.

(C) strengthens the argument - it makes infrequent drivers safer.

(D) is irrelevant since we don't know how making a long-distance trip affects things.

(E) strengthens the argument.

Does that clear it up?

[ramneet.sierra]

Thank you! I get it now!