I guess, and this is again only a guess, what we are looking for here, is another backup explanation for Samuel's inability to catch sufficient fish. His sickness explains that inability without putting a doubt on his quality as a fisherman.
I would select C over A because C is more directly relevant to the time fram under consideration than A. Otherwise, A also seems to provide a supporting evidence to the contrary and should suffice as an explanation.
Folks, what is the OA?
the OA is D... not sure why..i'm still not convinced why D and why not A..
Photovoltaic power plants produce electricity from sunlight. As a result of astonishing recent technological advances, the cost of producing electric power at photovoltaic power plants, allowing for both construction and operating costs, is one-tenth of what it was 20 years ago, whereas the corresponding cost for traditional plants, which burn fossil fuels, has increased. Thus, photovoltaic power plants offer a less expensive approach to meeting demand for electricity than do traditional power plants. The conclusion of the argument is properly drawn if which one of the following is assumed? (A) The cost of producing electric power at traditional plants has increased over the past 20 years. (B) Twenty years ago, traditional power plants were producing 10 times more electric power than were photovoltaic plants. (C) None of the recent technological advances in producing electric power at photovoltaic plants can be applied to producing power at traditional plants. (D) Twenty years ago, the cost of producing electric power at photovoltaic plants was less than 20 times the cost of producing power at traditional plants (E) The cost of producing electric power at photovoltaic plants is expected to decrease further, while the cost of producing power at traditional plants is not expected to decrease. OA is D.. please advise why D? 20 times has not been mentioned anywhere in the premise
Photovoltaic power plants produce electricity from sunlight. As a result of astonishing recent technological advances, the cost of producing electric power at photovoltaic power plants, allowing for both construction and operating costs, is one-tenth of what it was 20 years ago, whereas the corresponding cost for traditional plants, which burn fossil fuels, has increased. Thus, photovoltaic power plants offer a less expensive approach to meeting demand for electricity than do traditional power plants. The conclusion of the argument is properly drawn if which one of the following is assumed? (A) The cost of producing electric power at traditional plants has increased over the past 20 years. (B) Twenty years ago, traditional power plants were producing 10 times more electric power than were photovoltaic plants. (C) None of the recent technological advances in producing electric power at photovoltaic plants can be applied to producing power at traditional plants. (D) Twenty years ago, the cost of producing electric power at photovoltaic plants was less than 20 times the cost of producing power at traditional plants (E) The cost of producing electric power at photovoltaic plants is expected to decrease further, while the cost of producing power at traditional plants is not expected to decrease. OA is D.. please advise why D? 20 times has not been mentioned anywhere in the premise
Assumption is the one which will not be given in the passage ! whole passage is about photovoltaic power plants offer a less expensive approach to meeting demand for electricity than do traditional power plants.
premise : cost of producing electric power at photovoltaic power plants, allowing for both construction and operating costs, is one-tenth of what it was 20 years ago, whereas the corresponding cost for traditional plants, which burn fossil fuels, has increased. so (D) Twenty years ago, the cost of producing electric power at photovoltaic plants was less than 20 times the cost of producing power at traditional plants
Assumption is the one which will not be given in the passage ! whole passage is about photovoltaic power plants offer a less expensive approach to meeting demand for electricity than do traditional power plants.
premise : cost of producing electric power at photovoltaic power plants, allowing for both construction and operating costs, is one-tenth of what it was 20 years ago, whereas the corresponding cost for traditional plants, which burn fossil fuels, has increased. so (D) Twenty years ago, the cost of producing electric power at photovoltaic plants was less than 20 times the cost of producing power at traditional plants
Thanks naga25french I understand your point...we are allowed to bring in new information in a assumption answers and the answers stated does not have to necessarly belong to premise
Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people in this country now report that they know someone who is unemployed. Sharon: But a normal, moderate level of unemployment is 5 percent, with 1 out of 20 workers unemployed. So at any given time if a person knows approximately 50 workers, 1 or more will very likely be unemployed.
Sharon's argument relies on the assumption that (A) normal levels of unemployment are rarely exceeded (B) unemployment is not normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of the population (C) the number of people who each know someone who is unemployed is always higher than 90% of the population (D) Roland is not consciously distorting the statistics he presents (E) knowledge that a personal acquaintance is unemployed generates more fear of losing one's job than does knowledge of unemployment statistics need expln..
IMO B.. because If it sticks to some specific place then that 5% - moderate level - is voilated..
Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people in this country now report that they know someone who is unemployed. Sharon: But a normal, moderate level of unemployment is 5 percent, with 1 out of 20 workers unemployed. So at any given time if a person knows approximately 50 workers, 1 or more will very likely be unemployed.
Sharons argument relies on the assumption that (A) normal levels of unemployment are rarely exceeded (B) unemployment is not normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of the population (C) the number of people who each know someone who is unemployed is always higher than 90% of the population (D) Roland is not consciously distorting the statistics he presents (E) knowledge that a personal acquaintance is unemployed generates more fear of losing ones job than does knowledge of unemployment statistics need expln..
Roland: The alarming fact is that 90 percent of the people in this country now report that they know someone who is unemployed. Sharon: But a normal, moderate level of unemployment is 5 percent, with 1 out of 20 workers unemployed. So at any given time if a person knows approximately 50 workers, 1 or more will very likely be unemployed.
Sharons argument relies on the assumption that (A) normal levels of unemployment are rarely exceeded (B) unemployment is not normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of the population (C) the number of people who each know someone who is unemployed is always higher than 90% of the population (D) Roland is not consciously distorting the statistics he presents (E) knowledge that a personal acquaintance is unemployed generates more fear of losing ones job than does knowledge of unemployment statistics need expln..
IMO: B
A. Irrelevant. We are given statistics for a specific period and normal levels are irrelevant to us.
B. Correct. Sharon inherently assumes an even distribution of unemployment. Uneven geographical distribution might reduce the unemployment conc. in one area so much that even knowing 50 people might not be enough to know someone unemployed.
C. Irrelevant.
D. Again irrelevant. Nothing mentioned about distortion anywhere in the passage.
E. Irrelevant. The passage does not talk of fear anywhere.
Hi...as per my view 'B' should be the correct answer after eliminating other choices. 'A' seems to be more of conclusion rather than assumption. 'C' is extreme. 'E' is irrelevant. 'D' is indicating reverse phenomena.
A survey of small businesses owned equally by two partners revealed that when the partners keep different work schedules from each other, they tend to spend less time discussing key business issues and are more likely to have major disagreements about how to run their companies. Thus, it appears that misalignment of work schedules can be a serious risk for small business partnerships. Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?
A. Some business partners who work together all the time still have significant differences of opinion about how best to run their company.
B.The work schedules of the owners of small businesses tend to vary over time because of economic cycles.
c. Business partners who work very long hours together can sometimes alienate family members and friends.
D. Business partners who are not able to reach a consensus on major business issues often adopt different schedules in order to avoid conflict.
E.Business partners who express a willingness to be flexible have found that they can easily align their work schedules more closely.
A survey of small businesses owned equally by two partners revealed that when the partners keep different work schedules from each other, they tend to spend less time discussing key business issues and are more likely to have major disagreements about how to run their companies. Thus, it appears that misalignment of work schedules can be a serious risk for small business partnerships. Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?
A. Some business partners who work together all the time still have significant differences of opinion about how best to run their company.
B.The work schedules of the owners of small businesses tend to vary over time because of economic cycles.
c. Business partners who work very long hours together can sometimes alienate family members and friends.
D. Business partners who are not able to reach a consensus on major business issues often adopt different schedules in order to avoid conflict.
E.Business partners who express a willingness to be flexible have found that they can easily align their work schedules more closely.
A survey of small businesses owned equally by two partners revealed that when the partners keep different work schedules from each other, they tend to spend less time discussing key business issues and are more likely to have major disagreements about how to run their companies. Thus, it appears that misalignment of work schedules can be a serious risk for small business partnerships. Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?
A. Some business partners who work together all the time still have significant differences of opinion about how best to run their company.
B.The work schedules of the owners of small businesses tend to vary over time because of economic cycles.
c. Business partners who work very long hours together can sometimes alienate family members and friends.
D. Business partners who are not able to reach a consensus on major business issues often adopt different schedules in order to avoid conflict.
E.Business partners who express a willingness to be flexible have found that they can easily align their work schedules more closely.
IMO: D
This is a classic cause reversal example. To weaken the argument, what has been cited as the cause might actually be the result.
Thus the premise of the argument that different work schedules cause the disagreements does not hold true if, in fact, it is the disagreements which are causing the different work schedules.
A survey of small businesses owned equally by two partners revealed that when the partners keep different work schedules from each other, they tend to spend less time discussing key business issues and are more likely to have major disagreements about how to run their companies. Thus, it appears that misalignment of work schedules can be a serious risk for small business partnerships. Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?
A. Some business partners who work together all the time still have significant differences of opinion about how best to run their company.
B.The work schedules of the owners of small businesses tend to vary over time because of economic cycles.
c. Business partners who work very long hours together can sometimes alienate family members and friends.
D. Business partners who are not able to reach a consensus on major business issues often adopt different schedules in order to avoid conflict.
E.Business partners who express a willingness to be flexible have found that they can easily align their work schedules more closely.
IMO D, since working at different schedules is causing problems now if we can find something, which is opposite and beneficial in such a condition will be an appropriate answer. So, its D.
This is a classic cause reversal example. To weaken the argument, what has been cited as the cause might actually be the result.
Thus the premise of the argument that different work schedules cause the disagreements does not hold true if, in fact, it is the disagreements which are causing the different work schedules.
Whats the OA?
IMO D, since working at different schedules is causing problems now if we can find something, which is opposite and beneficial in such a condition will be an appropriate answer. So, its D.
Whats the OA?
Thats right...OA is D...
Can you advise me some techniques for such cause-result types CR.
It should be D...--> samuel used experimental bait unlike his other teammates. since he was using an experimental bait which he was not accustomed to...this led to his catching fewer no of fish than his friends....which weakens the argument....dat he is a bad fisherman...
why not 'A'--> I guess...explntn cud be....catching more fishes than others 'once' does not go to prove that he is good/avrg fisherman neither does it prove that he is bad fisherman and hence the reason does not sound so convincing as an argument, whereas in D consistently using an experimental bait to catch fish resulted in his catching fewer specifically weakens saying he is atleast not a bad fisherman...
It should be D...--> samuel used experimental bait unlike his other teammates. since he was using an experimental bait which he was not accustomed to...this led to his catching fewer no of fish than his friends....which weakens the argument....dat he is a bad fisherman...
why not 'A'--> I guess...explntn cud be....catching more fishes than others 'once' does not go to prove that he is good/avrg fisherman neither does it prove that he is bad fisherman and hence the reason does not sound so convincing as an argument, whereas in D consistently using an experimental bait to catch fish resulted in his catching fewer specifically weakens saying he is atleast not a bad fisherman...
