Free Practice Question
CR · Critical Reasoning
555-605
Weaken
Many environmental advocates support the elimination of regulations on activities deemed 'non-harmful,' which typically include practices like camping, hiking, and fishing. However, it is debatable whether fishing can genuinely be classified as a non-harmful activity. Beyond the ecological impact on fish populations, the practice can lead to significant distress for those who care about the environment, such as conservationists and local communities, who may witness the depletion of natural resources. In this sense, fishing cannot easily be considered a non-harmful activity.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?
Answer Choices
Sign in to reveal the correct answerA
Fishing can also lead to economic benefits for local communities, which may offset environmental concerns.
B
Many outdoor activities, including camping and hiking, can also have negative impacts on the environment.
C
Those who are concerned about environmental issues cannot strictly be considered victims of fishing practices.
D
Not all environmental advocates agree that all regulations on non-harmful activities should be removed.
E
Evidence suggests that attempts to regulate fishing have often been ineffective.
Reveal the correct answer
Sign in for free to check your answer and unlock the full explanation.
Track your performance and improve
Get detailed analytics, unlock full explanations, and move up difficulty tiers as you practice.
Explanation
Unlock the full explanation
Create a free account to reveal the correct answer, see the step-by-step explanation, and start tracking your GMAT progress.
Comments
3
Sign in to join the discussion
A
AlkaApr 1, 2025
thanks a lot
Details
Difficulty
555-605
Type
CR