Call Support +91-85588-96644
TCYonline

Login

Sign Up

Please enter a Username or Email ID
Please enter a password
Keep me logged in
Please enter your name
Please enter your mobile number
You can't leave Captcha Code empty
By submitting this form, you agree to the Terms & Privacy Policy.
OR

Sign Up via Facebook

Sign Up via Google

Sign Up via Twitter

Download Software
Tests given

Download TCY App

App Image
Posted on Apr 09, 2015 10:27 PM

Q17
The author for a consumer-products magazine states that there are 2 kinds of medication available for curing excessive acid build up and that those are available in mild non prescriptive and super strength prescriptive forms. He further provides a fact that doctors have prescribed strongest Acid-ease more than strongest Pepticaid and concludes in the end that this is the big enough reason for showing the effectiveness of milder form of Acid-ease over the other milder medicine.
The argument seems plausible but there are some logical flaws. Firstly, the author is silent on the time and the duration when the survey was conducted. Secondly, the argument does not state the group of people study might have been carried out. Thirdly, the author presumes the effectiveness on wrong cause and effect relationship that since the stronger of the Acid-ease worked well does not imply the milder would have similar results.
The first flaw is that the study on which the author believes could be flawed in itself. It could have been true that more prescriptions of stronger Acid-ease happened at a time when there was no stronger Pepticaid available in the market and that the study might have been concluded by the time it was made available. The doctors considered for the claim might have been biased and could have been working on for achieving own goals in terms of addition in their incomes. If the circumstances on the study were provided, the claim could have been convincing.
Secondly, the study may have been carried out on a homogenous group of people and that the location may be abundant in those certain type. The effectiveness of a medicine could be more in older than younger group of people or in women as compared to men. If the author was provided with such information, his conclusion might have been different.
Thirdly, the conclusion of the author states wrong cause and effect relation. The efficiency of milder Acid-ease may not be similar to the more powerful form of the medicine. It could be dependent on certain external factors. This cannot be the only factor affecting the result. Other details such as pricing, the availability and the side effects of the medicine could be the reasons made to believe in author’s conclusion.
Thus, the argument is not logically convincing. If the above mentioned evidence was supported within the argument, the article would have been strengthened and hence more believable.

Reply


Please type your answer before submitting.
Submit

Sabinder, more or less you have covered all the important points, but when you started developing on your arguments, things started becoming very clumsy. Somewhere midway the reader loses connect. Try to simplify from "The first flaw...". May be then it could be understood better.