This is a weaken question. Let's first assess the passage carefully.
Premise: A teacher's job is to make the facts and rules explicit to students, and convey those facts and rules to students via practice drills or coaching.
Premise: Understanding requires the grasp of general concepts underlying facts and rules.
Conclusion: Therefore, the hope that computers will eventually replace teachers is fundamentally misguided.
This is a faulty argument. The conclusion does not follow logically from the premises. The conclusion requires a missing assumption: that computers cannot convey general concepts.
Answer choice (C) negates this missing assumption, weakening the conclusion. If it is possible to program computers so that they can teach the understanding of general concepts that underlie facts and rules, then this is not a reason that will prevent computers from eventually replacing teachers.
Hope this helps! Please let us know if you have any additional questions.
