Official Explanation

Argument Evaluation

During the Aeronautic Board (AB)'s annual inspection, it found more violations among Azura Airlines' airplanes this year than last. The argument suggests that this increase in the number of violations provides an explanation for why Azura Airlines experienced more accidents this year than last. We must choose the statement that most weakens the conclusion.

A. This statement is outside the scope of the argument; aviation experts in foreign countries' opinion of AB has no bearing on the AB and its evaluation of Azura Airlines.

B. This statement is outside the scope of the argument; even if Azura's routes are more dangerous than its competitors', the relationship between Azura's routes and other airlines' routes has no bearing on the AB and its evaluation of Azura Airlines.

C. Correct. This statement provides an alternative reason that the number of violations for Azura Airlines would have increased. That is, if the AB conducted more extensive and more rigorous inspections this year, then it is very likely that the number of violations found by the AB would increase. In other words, if more points are tested or existing tests are made stricter, then the increase in rigor of the testing would presumably lead to an increase in violations.

D. This statement is outside the scope of the argument; the argument only concerns last year as compared to this year. Azura Airlines' record prior to last year is irrelevant to this.

E. This information does not apply to the argument at hand; the argument only concerns the planes that were in fact counted both years. If we could take this information to imply that even more Azura-owned airplanes violate safety standards than previously thought, this would actually strengthen the argument rather than weaken it.

The correct answer is C.