Q23 - Company president: Our consultants report

[NicholasL644]

I am having great difficulty with this one.
For (A), using the same criteria doesn't actually weaken, if they are accurate criteria. For example healthy people have good BMI. Both are measured only through BMI. Still holds that improving BMI improves health. For (A) to weaken I have to assume that for them to do something as pointless as using the same criteria, they would have to have made some error in criteria selection. But I cannot just assume people made mistakes e.g. Does "the consultants used an advanced statistical technique to interpret their results" weaken the argument? Yes because I assume they made a mistake...?!?! If the criteria were justified even though repeated, and I would think so unless through a random assumption as illustrated above, (A) does not weaken.

(D) also does not weaken but that's the correct answer.

(E) is such a weak weaken. For example, when people are killed they die, so to make people die we should kill them. But most people who die are not killed. So killing people would actually not be effective at making them die. Of course here I for simplicity used something correlated by definition, but I just want to illustrate I would have to again randomly make a comparable unwarranted assumption that since most efficient managers have not attended the seminar, the correlation is weakened. In both the strength of the correlation is variable but the unwarranted assumption required by the answer to weaken is uh, unwarranted.

[ldfdsa]

About D, here is my two cents.

we should know that not "need" to improve their productivity does not deny the fact attending time-mng seminar WILL increase productivity. The president's recommendation still holds.

So, no weaken here.