Question

Which of the following, if true, would most directly challenge the author's argument about the root cause of societal crisis?

• A. Regions with revitalised workplace ethics programs show no improvement in political polarisation or suicide rates.
• B. Some individuals who report strong familial moral instruction still engage in occasional online hostility and selfish behaviour.
• C. Nations with robust community organisations but high inequality exhibit similar rates of despair and rudeness.
• D. Deaths tied to despair correlate more strongly with stagnant wages than with declines in religious affiliation.
• E. Social media platforms that ban anonymous hateful postings see increased user kindness but unchanged depression metrics.

Hint:

In boldface questions, first identify the main conclusion of the argument. Then, determine the relationship of each boldfaced statement to that conclusion. Is it evidence for the conclusion? Is it the conclusion itself? Is it an opposing viewpoint? Is it a consideration that the author must address?

Answer 1

The Correct Option is D

Step 1: Understanding the Concept
This is a "Weaken" question. We first have to infer the author's argument about the "root cause" and then find an option that attacks it. Based on Q51's mention of "moral formation," the author's likely argument is that the crisis stems from a decline in moral institutions (family, community, religion), rather than from economic or structural problems.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation
To weaken this argument, we need to show that either (1) these moral institutions are not the primary factor, or (2) another factor (like economics) is more important.

(A) is weak; workplace ethics are only one small part of "moral formation."
(B) is also weak; "some individuals" and "occasional" misbehavior doesn't disprove a general trend.
(C) is a decent challenger, suggesting inequality (a structural issue) matters more than community strength (a moral institution).
(E) is about social media, which the author likely already considers a secondary cause.
(D) is the strongest challenger. It directly pits an economic factor ("stagnant wages") against a "moral formation" factor ("declines in religious affiliation") and provides statistical evidence that the economic factor has a *stronger correlation* with a key outcome ("deaths tied to despair"). This provides a powerful alternative explanation for the crisis, directly undermining the author's claim that the root cause is primarily moral, not economic.
Step 3: Final Answer
Option (D) most directly challenges the inferred central thesis by providing evidence that an economic cause is more predictive of the crisis than a moral/institutional cause.