Question

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the argument presented in the previous question?

• A. Nietzsche was forced to use a typewriter when he started losing his vision. After he mastered the machine, he could type with his eyes closed. It was later found that under the effect of the machine, Nietzsche’s prose “changed from arguments to aphorisms, from thoughts to puns, from rhetoric to telegram style.”
• B. One of the effects of the timekeeping instruments has been that we have started deciding on our daily activities based on the clock and not based on our senses.
• C. Studies have shown that the essay writing skills of an average 15–20 year old, who spends a lot of time browsing the internet, is comparable to what it was among the average 15–20 year old throughout the 1980s and the 1990s.
• D. A recent study has shown that the number of people who fall asleep while reading a printed book has increased in the last five years.
• E. The ability of the younger judges, who have grown up with ready access to the internet, to judge complex and intricate cases, has, on an average, become better as compared to what it was for judges of comparable age profile during the 1920s.

Hint:

When weakening an argument, look for evidence that shows the opposite trend of the claim. Here, the claim was “internet harms concentration”; hence, data showing “internet improves judgment” is the best counter.

Answer 1

Answer: (E)

Step 1: Recall the previous claim.
The earlier question argued that the internet is reducing concentration ability. To weaken this, we must show evidence of \emph{improved or unaffected cognitive performance} in spite of internet usage.

Step 2: Evaluate options.
- (A) Nietzsche’s style shift — irrelevant to concentration.
- (B) Timekeeping effect — unrelated to concentration or internet.
- (C) Essay-writing skill unchanged — suggests no decline, but not a strong contradiction.
- (D) Falling asleep while reading — strengthens, not weakens.
- (E) Judges with internet access perform better in complex cases — strong contradiction, showing internet exposure may even enhance critical judgment.


Step 3: Conclude.
Since option (E) demonstrates cognitive enhancement rather than decline, it directly weakens the argument. \[ \boxed{\text{(E) Internet improves judges’ ability → weakens concentration decline claim.}} \]