CAT 2023 Slot 2 · VARC · Question 23
CAT 2023 Slot 2 previous year question on Strengthen and Weaken Arguments, with the answer and a step-by-step solution.
RC passage 4: Second-Hand Fashion and Sustainability — this question belongs to a set. Read the full set with all 4 questions →
The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.
The Second Hand September campaign, led by Oxfam . . . seeks to encourage shopping at local organisations and charities as alternatives to fast fashion brands such as Primark and Boohoo in the name of saving our planet. As innocent as mindless scrolling through online shops may seem, such consumers are unintentionally—or perhaps even knowingly—contributing to an industry that uses more energy than aviation. . . .
Brits buy more garments than any other country in Europe, so it comes as no shock that many of those clothes end up in UK landfills each year: 300,000 tonnes of them, to be exact. This waste of clothing is destructive to our planet, releasing greenhouse gasses as clothes are burnt as well as bleeding toxins and dyes into the surrounding soil and water. As ecologist Chelsea Rochman bluntly put it, “The mismanagement of our waste has even come back to haunt us on our dinner plate.”
It’s not surprising, then, that people are scrambling for a solution, the most common of which is second-hand shopping. Retailers selling consigned clothing are currently expanding at a rapid rate . . . If everyone bought just one used item in a year, it would save 449 million lbs of waste, equivalent to the weight of 1 million Polar bears. “Thrifting” has increasingly become a trendy practice. London is home to many second-hand, or more commonly coined ‘vintage’, shops across the city from Bayswater to Brixton.
So you’re cool and you care about the planet; you’ve killed two birds with one stone. But do people simply purchase a second-hand item, flash it on Instagram with #vintage and call it a day without considering whether what they are doing is actually effective?
According to a study commissioned by Patagonia, for instance, older clothes shed more microfibres. These can end up in our rivers and seas after just one wash due to the worn material, thus contributing to microfibre pollution. To break it down, the amount of microfibres released by laundering 100,000 fleece jackets is equivalent to as many as 11,900 plastic grocery bags, and up to 40 per cent of that ends up in our oceans. . . . So where does this leave second-hand consumers? [They would be well advised to buy] high-quality items that shed less and last longer [as this] combats both microfibre pollution and excess garments ending up in landfills. . . .
Luxury brands would rather not circulate their latest season stock around the globe to be sold at a cheaper price, which is why companies like ThredUP, a US fashion resale marketplace, have not yet caught on in the UK. There will always be a market for consignment but there is also a whole generation of people who have been taught that only buying new products is the norm; second-hand luxury goods are not in their psyche. Ben Whitaker, director at Liquidation Firm B-Stock, told Prospect that unless recycling becomes cost-effective and filters into mass production, with the right technology to partner it, “high-end retailers would rather put brand before sustainability.”
- Acustomers bought all their clothes online.
- BPrimark and Boohoo recycled their clothes for vintage stores.
- Csecond-hand stores sold only high-quality clothes.
- Dclothes were not thrown and burnt in landfills.
Answer & solution
Answer: Option C
The central idea is that second-hand shopping, though popular as a green choice, may not be effective, because older, worn clothes shed more microfibres; buyers are advised to choose 'high-quality items that shed less and last longer'.
Option 3 – second-hand stores sell only high-quality clothes – would remove the problem the passage raises, undermining its central concern.
Option 1 concerns online buying, which is not the issue.
Option 2 would add more second-hand stock but does nothing about microfibres.
Option 4 deals with landfill burning, only one part of the problem; the microfibre issue would remain.
Shortcut: to undermine a passage's central warning, look for an option that makes the warned-about problem disappear.
Hence, the answer is option 3.
More Strengthen and Weaken Arguments questions
- Q2Which one of the following, if true, would best complement the passage’s findings?CAT 2021 Slot 1 · VARC · Strengthen and Weaken Arguments
- Q13Which one of the following, if true, would not undermine the democratising potential of the Classic Maya worldview?CAT 2021 Slot 1 · VARC · Strengthen and Weaken Arguments
- Q23Which one of the following, if true, would weaken the author’s claims in the passage?CAT 2021 Slot 2 · VARC · Strengthen and Weaken Arguments
- Q4Which one of the following observations would most strengthen the passage's claim that a first-order tail event raises…CAT 2025 Slot 1 · VARC · Strengthen and Weaken Arguments
- Q11Which one of the following results for the cross between surface fish (with eyes) and cavefish (without eyes) would…CAT 2025 Slot 2 · VARC · Strengthen and Weaken Arguments
- Q15Which one of the following statements, if true, would be the most direct extension of the arguments in the passage?CAT 2021 Slot 3 · VARC · Strengthen and Weaken Arguments
All Strengthen and Weaken Arguments PYQs →
Take this paper as a timed test
Real exam timing, instant score, rank and topic-wise analysis.