by ohthatpatrick Tue Apr 30, 2013 2:49 pm
Good question.
Ultimately, I think this question defies any straightforward categorization, and it just serves as a reminder that we always have to be ready to roll with the punches.
You could call this Strengthen, if you think of your Conclusion as "the explanation above is only a partial one".
Or you could call this Weaken, if you think of your task as finding an alternate explanation, different from the one the argument cited.
In truth, I wouldn't bother trying to categorize it. I just want to be clear on what I need out of the correct answer.
They want me to find evidence that the explanation given above is only a partial one.
What explanation was given above?
It was explained that hard surfaces make for greater running speeds because they let the runner's foot make contact for less time.
So our job is to say, "Yes, hard surfaces allow the runner's foot to make contact for less time ... but there's also ANOTHER reason hard surfaces make for greater running speeds."
All I would be thinking going into the answer choices is, "which of these gives me ANOTHER reason why hard surfaces make for greater running speeds than soft ones?"
(A),(B), and (D) aren't even about hard surfaces vs. soft ones, so they're not worth thinking about.
(C) gives a reason that hard surfaces make for greater running speeds (we just have to make the common sense connection that "minimizing wind resistance" could allow for "greater running speeds").
(E) gives a distinction between hard and soft surfaces, but "different maintenance procedures" doesn't allow us to make any common sense connection to "greater running speeds".
Hope this helps.