Logical reasoning PrepTest 134 · Section 2 · Question 12

Incorrect. First, other businesses having risk doesn't affect the risk associated with worker—owned businesses. Second, failing to make full use of some employees' potential isn't saying much—they could still make use of 99.9% of that potential.

Incorrect. These lenders wouldn't seek to reduce their risk, so the conclusion doesn't apply to them ("lenders seeking to reduce their risk") and thus this answer is out of scope.

Incorrect. First, the question is whether these loans are risky, not how likely the two business types are to receive the loans. Second, the stimulus is about all loans, not just start—up loans.

Incorrect. Where they've traditionally received loans doesn't speak to how risky these loans are.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Weaken

Stimulus Summary:
Worker—owned business cons — Workers have to spend time on things that aren't directly productive. Divisions of labor are less extensive, which is inefficient and can lower profitability.
Conclusion — Lenders who want to minimize risk shouldn't lend to worker—owned businesses.

Answer Anticipation:
This argument concludes a recommendation—investors shouldn't invest in worker—owned businesses if they want to minimize risk.

When an argument makes a recommendation, it needs to establish what criteria should be used to analyze options and then discuss those criteria for the option being considered.

This stimulus does establish the relevant criteria—minimizing risk. That's the qualification in the conclusion, so the argument isn't flawed in that regard.

However, this argument follows a common flawed pattern of reasoning on the other required portion of an argument concluding a recommendation. While it discusses the cons of a certain option (investing in worker—owned businesses) as far as risks are concerned, it doesn't discuss the pros, and it doesn't establish that there aren't any pros.

Without giving both the pros and cons a fair shake, an argument can't validly make a recommendation. As such, the correct answer to weaken this argument should highlight a pro of investing in worker—owned businesses as far as minimizing risk is concerned.

Answer Explanation:
This answer highlights a pro of worker—owned businesses—workers that are willing to work longer hours to make up for inefficiencies. If this is the case, then there might not be the level of risk that the stimulus notes, and the recommendation might not be a good one. This answer weakens the recommendation.

Key Takeaway:
Arguments require the criteria for judgment to be made. They also require all relevant considerations to be discussed, or at least enough considerations that the outcome can be determined. When just the positives or negatives of a plan are presented, the argument is failing to consider the others.