All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
GMAT Exam  >  GMAT Questions  >  Opponents of drug laws that forbid using mari... Start Learning for Free
Opponents of drug laws that forbid using marijuana argue that in a free country, people have the right to take risks with their bodies as long as the people do not cause harm to befall others as a result of taking the risks. This principle leads them to conclude that each person should have the right to decide for him or herself whether to use marijuana.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?
  • a)
    The rate of overdose fatalities in countries that do not have drug laws that forbid using marijuana is greater than the rate of fatalities in countries that do have such laws.
  • b)
    Unlike cocaine or heroin, there is little evidence, if any, that marijuana is addictive.
  • c)
    A greater percentage of fatal car accidents are caused by marijuana users than by alcohol users.
  • d)
    There is no evidence to suggest that people suffer medical maladies as a result of second-hand marijuana smoke.
  • e)
    Health insurance rates for all people are higher because of the need to pay for the increased medical care users of marijuana require.
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Clear all your GMAT doubts with EduRev
Most Upvoted Answer
Opponents of drug laws that forbid using marijuana argue that in a fre...
The argument states that in a free country, people have the right to take risks with their bodies as long as they don't cause harm to others. Therefore, individuals should have the right to decide whether to use marijuana. To weaken this conclusion, we need to find an option that challenges the idea that using marijuana does not cause harm to others.
Let's analyze each answer choice:
(A) The rate of overdose fatalities in countries that do not have drug laws that forbid using marijuana is greater than the rate of fatalities in countries that do have such laws.
  • This answer choice is irrelevant to the conclusion because it focuses on overdose fatalities rather than harm caused to others. It does not provide any evidence regarding harm caused to third parties by marijuana users.
(B) Unlike cocaine or heroin, there is little evidence, if any, that marijuana is addictive.
  • This answer choice does not directly address the potential harm caused to others by marijuana users. It discusses the addictive properties of marijuana, but the argument is focused on the harm caused to others, not addiction.
(C) A greater percentage of fatal car accidents are caused by marijuana users than by alcohol users.
  • This answer choice weakens the conclusion because it presents evidence that marijuana users can cause harm to others through their actions. If marijuana users are responsible for a higher percentage of fatal car accidents compared to alcohol users, it suggests that the use of marijuana can result in harm to innocent individuals.
(D) There is no evidence to suggest that people suffer medical maladies as a result of second-hand marijuana smoke.
  • This answer choice does not directly address the potential harm caused to others by marijuana users. It focuses on second-hand smoke, but the argument is concerned with harm caused directly by the use of marijuana, rather than passive exposure to smoke.
(E) Health insurance rates for all people are higher because of the need to pay for the increased medical care users of marijuana require.
  • This answer choice does not directly address the potential harm caused to others by marijuana users. It focuses on increased health insurance rates but does not establish a causal link between marijuana users and harm to others.
Therefore, the most relevant answer choice that weakens the conclusion is (C). It challenges the argument by suggesting that marijuana users can cause harm to others through their actions, specifically by being involved in a greater percentage of fatal car accidents compared to alcohol users.
Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Similar GMAT Doubts

Directions: Read the Passage carefully and answer the question as follow.The word Inference is used in two different senses, which are often confused but should be carefully distinguished. In the first sense, it means a process of thought or reasoning by which the mind passes from facts or statements presented, to some opinion or expectation. The data may be very vague and slight, prompting no more than a guess or surmise; as from the trick of a man’s face entertain some prejudice as to his character. Or the data may be important and strongly significant, like the footprint that frightened Crusoe into thinking of cannibals, or as when news of war makes the city expect that Consols will fall. These are examples of the act of inferring, or of inference as a process; and with inference in this sense Logic has nothing to do; it belongs to Psychology to explain how it is that our minds pass from one perception or thought to another thought, and how we come to conjecture, conclude and believe. In the second sense, ‘inference’ means not this process of guessing or opining, but the result of it; the surmise, opinion, or belief when formed; in a word, the conclusion: and it is in this sense that Inference is treated off in Logic. The subject-matter of Logic is an inference, judgment or conclusion concerning facts, embodied in a proposition, which is to be examined in relation to the evidence that may be adduced for it, in order to determine whether, or how far, the evidence amounts to proof.Logic is the science of Reasoning in the sense in which ‘reasoning’ means giving reasons, for it shows what sort of reasons are good. Whilst Psychology explains how the mind goes forward from data to conclusions, Logic takes a conclusion and goes back to the data, inquiring whether those data, together with any other evidence (facts or principles) that can be collected, are of a nature to warrant the conclusion. If we think that John Doe is of an amiable disposition, that water expands on freezing, or that one means to national prosperity is popular education, and wish to know whether we have evidence sufficient to justify us in holding these opinions, Logic can tell us what form the evidence should assume in order to be conclusive. But whatever facts constitute the evidence, they must, in order to prove the point, admit of being stated in conformity with certain principles or conditions; and of these principles or conditions Logic is the science. It deals, then, not with the subjective process of inferring, but with the objective grounds that justify or discredit the inference.Q. As described in the passage, each of the following could be an example of Inference in terms of its first connotation, EXCEPT

Directions: Read the Passage carefully and answer the question as follow.The word Inference is used in two different senses, which are often confused but should be carefully distinguished. In the first sense, it means a process of thought or reasoning by which the mind passes from facts or statements presented, to some opinion or expectation. The data may be very vague and slight, prompting no more than a guess or surmise; as from the trick of a man’s face entertain some prejudice as to his character. Or the data may be important and strongly significant, like the footprint that frightened Crusoe into thinking of cannibals, or as when news of war makes the city expect that Consols will fall. These are examples of the act of inferring, or of inference as a process; and with inference in this sense Logic has nothing to do; it belongs to Psychology to explain how it is that our minds pass from one perception or thought to another thought, and how we come to conjecture, conclude and believe. In the second sense, ‘inference’ means not this process of guessing or opining, but the result of it; the surmise, opinion, or belief when formed; in a word, the conclusion: and it is in this sense that Inference is treated off in Logic. The subject-matter of Logic is an inference, judgment or conclusion concerning facts, embodied in a proposition, which is to be examined in relation to the evidence that may be adduced for it, in order to determine whether, or how far, the evidence amounts to proof.Logic is the science of Reasoning in the sense in which ‘reasoning’ means giving reasons, for it shows what sort of reasons are good. Whilst Psychology explains how the mind goes forward from data to conclusions, Logic takes a conclusion and goes back to the data, inquiring whether those data, together with any other evidence (facts or principles) that can be collected, are of a nature to warrant the conclusion. If we think that John Doe is of an amiable disposition, that water expands on freezing, or that one means to national prosperity is popular education, and wish to know whether we have evidence sufficient to justify us in holding these opinions, Logic can tell us what form the evidence should assume in order to be conclusive. But whatever facts constitute the evidence, they must, in order to prove the point, admit of being stated in conformity with certain principles or conditions; and of these principles or conditions Logic is the science. It deals, then, not with the subjective process of inferring, but with the objective grounds that justify or discredit the inference.Q. Which of the following best describes the relationship between Psychology and Logic?

Top Courses for GMATView all

Top Courses for GMAT

Opponents of drug laws that forbid using marijuana argue that in a free country, people have the right to take risks with their bodies as long as the people do not cause harm to befall others as a result of taking the risks. This principle leads them to conclude that each person should have the right to decide for him or herself whether to use marijuana.Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?a)The rate of overdose fatalities in countries that do not have drug laws that forbid using marijuana is greater than the rate of fatalities in countries that do have such laws.b)Unlike cocaine or heroin, there is little evidence, if any, that marijuana is addictive.c)A greater percentage of fatal car accidents are caused by marijuana users than by alcohol users.d)There is no evidence to suggest that people suffer medical maladies as a result of second-hand marijuana smoke.e)Health insurance rates for all people are higher because of the need to pay for the increased medical care users of marijuana require.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Opponents of drug laws that forbid using marijuana argue that in a free country, people have the right to take risks with their bodies as long as the people do not cause harm to befall others as a result of taking the risks. This principle leads them to conclude that each person should have the right to decide for him or herself whether to use marijuana.Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?a)The rate of overdose fatalities in countries that do not have drug laws that forbid using marijuana is greater than the rate of fatalities in countries that do have such laws.b)Unlike cocaine or heroin, there is little evidence, if any, that marijuana is addictive.c)A greater percentage of fatal car accidents are caused by marijuana users than by alcohol users.d)There is no evidence to suggest that people suffer medical maladies as a result of second-hand marijuana smoke.e)Health insurance rates for all people are higher because of the need to pay for the increased medical care users of marijuana require.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for GMAT 2025 is part of GMAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the GMAT exam syllabus. Information about Opponents of drug laws that forbid using marijuana argue that in a free country, people have the right to take risks with their bodies as long as the people do not cause harm to befall others as a result of taking the risks. This principle leads them to conclude that each person should have the right to decide for him or herself whether to use marijuana.Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?a)The rate of overdose fatalities in countries that do not have drug laws that forbid using marijuana is greater than the rate of fatalities in countries that do have such laws.b)Unlike cocaine or heroin, there is little evidence, if any, that marijuana is addictive.c)A greater percentage of fatal car accidents are caused by marijuana users than by alcohol users.d)There is no evidence to suggest that people suffer medical maladies as a result of second-hand marijuana smoke.e)Health insurance rates for all people are higher because of the need to pay for the increased medical care users of marijuana require.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for GMAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Opponents of drug laws that forbid using marijuana argue that in a free country, people have the right to take risks with their bodies as long as the people do not cause harm to befall others as a result of taking the risks. This principle leads them to conclude that each person should have the right to decide for him or herself whether to use marijuana.Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?a)The rate of overdose fatalities in countries that do not have drug laws that forbid using marijuana is greater than the rate of fatalities in countries that do have such laws.b)Unlike cocaine or heroin, there is little evidence, if any, that marijuana is addictive.c)A greater percentage of fatal car accidents are caused by marijuana users than by alcohol users.d)There is no evidence to suggest that people suffer medical maladies as a result of second-hand marijuana smoke.e)Health insurance rates for all people are higher because of the need to pay for the increased medical care users of marijuana require.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Opponents of drug laws that forbid using marijuana argue that in a free country, people have the right to take risks with their bodies as long as the people do not cause harm to befall others as a result of taking the risks. This principle leads them to conclude that each person should have the right to decide for him or herself whether to use marijuana.Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?a)The rate of overdose fatalities in countries that do not have drug laws that forbid using marijuana is greater than the rate of fatalities in countries that do have such laws.b)Unlike cocaine or heroin, there is little evidence, if any, that marijuana is addictive.c)A greater percentage of fatal car accidents are caused by marijuana users than by alcohol users.d)There is no evidence to suggest that people suffer medical maladies as a result of second-hand marijuana smoke.e)Health insurance rates for all people are higher because of the need to pay for the increased medical care users of marijuana require.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for GMAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for GMAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Opponents of drug laws that forbid using marijuana argue that in a free country, people have the right to take risks with their bodies as long as the people do not cause harm to befall others as a result of taking the risks. This principle leads them to conclude that each person should have the right to decide for him or herself whether to use marijuana.Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?a)The rate of overdose fatalities in countries that do not have drug laws that forbid using marijuana is greater than the rate of fatalities in countries that do have such laws.b)Unlike cocaine or heroin, there is little evidence, if any, that marijuana is addictive.c)A greater percentage of fatal car accidents are caused by marijuana users than by alcohol users.d)There is no evidence to suggest that people suffer medical maladies as a result of second-hand marijuana smoke.e)Health insurance rates for all people are higher because of the need to pay for the increased medical care users of marijuana require.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Opponents of drug laws that forbid using marijuana argue that in a free country, people have the right to take risks with their bodies as long as the people do not cause harm to befall others as a result of taking the risks. This principle leads them to conclude that each person should have the right to decide for him or herself whether to use marijuana.Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?a)The rate of overdose fatalities in countries that do not have drug laws that forbid using marijuana is greater than the rate of fatalities in countries that do have such laws.b)Unlike cocaine or heroin, there is little evidence, if any, that marijuana is addictive.c)A greater percentage of fatal car accidents are caused by marijuana users than by alcohol users.d)There is no evidence to suggest that people suffer medical maladies as a result of second-hand marijuana smoke.e)Health insurance rates for all people are higher because of the need to pay for the increased medical care users of marijuana require.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Opponents of drug laws that forbid using marijuana argue that in a free country, people have the right to take risks with their bodies as long as the people do not cause harm to befall others as a result of taking the risks. This principle leads them to conclude that each person should have the right to decide for him or herself whether to use marijuana.Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?a)The rate of overdose fatalities in countries that do not have drug laws that forbid using marijuana is greater than the rate of fatalities in countries that do have such laws.b)Unlike cocaine or heroin, there is little evidence, if any, that marijuana is addictive.c)A greater percentage of fatal car accidents are caused by marijuana users than by alcohol users.d)There is no evidence to suggest that people suffer medical maladies as a result of second-hand marijuana smoke.e)Health insurance rates for all people are higher because of the need to pay for the increased medical care users of marijuana require.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Opponents of drug laws that forbid using marijuana argue that in a free country, people have the right to take risks with their bodies as long as the people do not cause harm to befall others as a result of taking the risks. This principle leads them to conclude that each person should have the right to decide for him or herself whether to use marijuana.Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?a)The rate of overdose fatalities in countries that do not have drug laws that forbid using marijuana is greater than the rate of fatalities in countries that do have such laws.b)Unlike cocaine or heroin, there is little evidence, if any, that marijuana is addictive.c)A greater percentage of fatal car accidents are caused by marijuana users than by alcohol users.d)There is no evidence to suggest that people suffer medical maladies as a result of second-hand marijuana smoke.e)Health insurance rates for all people are higher because of the need to pay for the increased medical care users of marijuana require.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Opponents of drug laws that forbid using marijuana argue that in a free country, people have the right to take risks with their bodies as long as the people do not cause harm to befall others as a result of taking the risks. This principle leads them to conclude that each person should have the right to decide for him or herself whether to use marijuana.Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the conclusion drawn above?a)The rate of overdose fatalities in countries that do not have drug laws that forbid using marijuana is greater than the rate of fatalities in countries that do have such laws.b)Unlike cocaine or heroin, there is little evidence, if any, that marijuana is addictive.c)A greater percentage of fatal car accidents are caused by marijuana users than by alcohol users.d)There is no evidence to suggest that people suffer medical maladies as a result of second-hand marijuana smoke.e)Health insurance rates for all people are higher because of the need to pay for the increased medical care users of marijuana require.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice GMAT tests.
Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Top Courses for GMAT

Explore Courses
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App for FREE
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev
Get App
© EduRev
Education Revolution
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup