I need some help on the attached question. This is from GMATPrep and I got it wrong. The option marked with the bold black dot in the attachment is my wrong answer. The option marked by a square blue frame is the correct answers marked by the software. However the software does not explain why a particular choice is correct and others are wrong. I will be very grateful if someone can help justify why the correct choice is actually correct. Thanks in advance.
Cheers!
The reasoning behind the correct answer choice is as follows: The argument says that tall seating would lead to increase in profits for the restaurant by allowing the viewers to have a better view of the celebrities.But, will that really lead to more profits? What if the people who were there to just get a glimpse of the celebs didnt order anything expensive or ordered very less?That wouldnt lead to profits at all. Hence C.
Business are suffering because of lack of money available for development loans.Ot help businesses, the govt. plans to modify the income tax structure in order to induce individual taxpayers to put a large portion of their incomes into retirement savings accounts, because as more money is deposited in such accounts, more money becomes available to borrowers. Whicb of the following most seriusly undermines the effectiveness of the govt. plan to increase the amount of moneyavailable for development loans for business? A When level of personal retirement savings increase, consumer borrowing always increases correspondingly. B The increased tax revenue the govt. would receive as a result of business expansion would not offset the loss in revenue from personla income taxes during the first year of its plan
C Even with tax incentives, some people will choose not to increase their levels of retirmentsavings
D Bankers generally wil not continue to lend money to businesses whose prospective earnings are insufficient to meet their loan repayment schedules
E The modified tax structure wold give all taxpayers, regardless of their incomes, the same tax savings for a given increase in their retirement savings.
OA is A. Isn' t option A strengthening the argument?
Business are suffering because of lack of money available for development loans.Ot help businesses, the govt. plans to modify the income tax structure in order to induce individual taxpayers to put a large portion of their incomes into retirement savings accounts, because as more money is deposited in such accounts, more money becomes available to borrowers. Whicb of the following most seriusly undermines the effectiveness of the govt. plan to increase the amount of moneyavailable for development loans for business? A When level of personal retirement savings increase, consumer borrowing always increases correspondingly. B The increased tax revenue the govt. would receive as a result of business expansion would not offset the loss in revenue from personla income taxes during the first year of its plan
C Even with tax incentives, some people will choose not to increase their levels of retirmentsavings
D Bankers generally wil not continue to lend money to businesses whose prospective earnings are insufficient to meet their loan repayment schedules
E The modified tax structure wold give all taxpayers, regardless of their incomes, the same tax savings for a given increase in their retirement savings.
OA is A. Isn' t option A strengthening the argument?
On first look, it does seem like, it is strengthening the argument. The catch word here is consumer borrowing. The government wants money in savings, so that businesses can borrow that money. If the consumers(Retail borrowers .. ppl who take a home loan or an auto loan or a personal loan etc) end up taking all the money(corresponding increase) then the businesses dont get access to extra credit and continue to suffer(Business are suffering because of lack of money available for development loans).
The reasoning behind the correct answer choice is as follows: The argument says that tall seating would lead to increase in profits for the restaurant by allowing the viewers to have a better view of the celebrities.But, will that really lead to more profits? What if the people who were there to just get a glimpse of the celebs didnt order anything expensive or ordered very less?That wouldnt lead to profits at all. Hence C.
My take on the explanation: A and B are irrelevant as they talk about what the celebrities would do. Nothing in the argument says that there is a correlation between time spent and cost of food ordered. It just says that stools would mean lower turnaround time for each customer, thereby increasing the number of customers coming into Hollywood. E is irrelevant and absurd. By process of elimination C seems to be a good choice, Now look @ why it actually is.
"Many customers come to watch the celebritis who frequent Hollywood"and"They would prefer tables with stools because such seating would afford a better view of the celebrities". Combining these two we can say that the customer would spend more time lingering around Hollywood as he is getting what he came for - "A better view of the celebrities" This breaks the argument that "They typically DO NOT stay as long as diners seated at std. ht. tables" And thus the flaw in the argument is that it wants us to believe/accept that the customers would be an exception to the logical generalization about lingering.
Clearly one of the toughest CRs, I have seen from the GMAC stable.
1.Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank, the bank's depositors, who had been worried by rumors that the bank faced impending financial collapse, have been greatly relieved. They reason that since top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false. They might well be overoptimistic, however since corporate executives have sometimes bought shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health.
In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles? A. The first summarizes the evidence used in the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second states the counterevidence on which the argument relies. B. The first summarizes the evidence used in the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second is an intermediate conclusion supported by the evidence. C. The first is an intermediate conclusion that forms part of the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second is evidence that undermines the support for this intermediate conclusion. D. The first is an intermediate conclusion that forms part of the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second is the main conclusion of the argument. E. The first is an intermediate conclusion that forms part of the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second states a further conclusion supported by this intermediate conclusion.
1.Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank, the bank's depositors, who had been worried by rumors that the bank faced impending financial collapse, have been greatly relieved. They reason that since top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false. They might well be overoptimistic, however since corporate executives have sometimes bought shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health.
In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles? A. The first summarizes the evidence used in the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second states the counterevidence on which the argument relies. B. The first summarizes the evidence used in the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second is an intermediate conclusion supported by the evidence. C. The first is an intermediate conclusion that forms part of the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second is evidence that undermines the support for this intermediate conclusion. D. The first is an intermediate conclusion that forms part of the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second is the main conclusion of the argument. E. The first is an intermediate conclusion that forms part of the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second states a further conclusion supported by this intermediate conclusion.
1.Since it has become known that several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank, the bank's depositors, who had been worried by rumors that the bank faced impending financial collapse, have been greatly relieved. They reason that since top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false. They might well be overoptimistic, however since corporate executives have sometimes bought shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company's health.
In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles? A. The first summarizes the evidence used in the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second states the counterevidence on which the argument relies. B. The first summarizes the evidence used in the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second is an intermediate conclusion supported by the evidence. C. The first is an intermediate conclusion that forms part of the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second is evidence that undermines the support for this intermediate conclusion. D. The first is an intermediate conclusion that forms part of the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second is the main conclusion of the argument. E. The first is an intermediate conclusion that forms part of the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second states a further conclusion supported by this intermediate conclusion.
Neo
Choice D The first line is not an evidence, its an intermediate conclusion (derived from the evidence that Top executives are buying shares in their own bank) drawn by the bank's depositors. It is this conclusion/reasoning that is called into question later in the argument. The second line is again not an evidence (might well be overoptimistic). It clearly is a conclusion and is contrary to the inetermediate conclusion, which leaves us with choice D. Also this is the final conclusion that the author hints at thus making it the main conclusion of the passage. D is the winner
Choice D The first line is not an evidence, its an intermediate conclusion (derived from the evidence that Top executives are buying shares in their own bank) drawn by the bank's depositors. It is this conclusion/reasoning that is called into question later in the argument. The second line is again not an evidence (might well be overoptimistic). It clearly is a conclusion and is contrary to the inetermediate conclusion, which leaves us with choice D. Also this is the final conclusion that the author hints at thus making it the main conclusion of the passage. D is the winner
Ok that was very close..The given OA is E!!
Wud u want to refine ur reasoning or wud stick with it?? btw i have no explanation. just want to see if someone can reason this out boldly
Choice D The first line is not an evidence, its an intermediate conclusion (derived from the evidence that Top executives are buying shares in their own bank) drawn by the bank's depositors. It is this conclusion/reasoning that is called into question later in the argument. The second line is again not an evidence (might well be overoptimistic). It clearly is a conclusion and is contrary to the inetermediate conclusion, which leaves us with choice D. Also this is the final conclusion that the author hints at thus making it the main conclusion of the passage. D is the winner
Alrite lemme try. The part "The first is an intermediate conclusion that forms part of the reasoning called into question by the argument;" is undoubtedly correct since it is an intermediate conclusion after all and not evidence as suggested by options A and B. So C,D and E are left.
"They might well be overoptimistic" is again not an evidence. So C is gone.
Out of options D and E, i think this part is just another conclusion and not the main conclusion. The main conclusion of the argument has to be something on the lines of "Hence the rumors that the bank faced impending financial collapse might as well be true."
That makes E the winner. But of course, with the OA out, reasoning gets a little more focussed 😁
Alrite lemme try. The part "The first is an intermediate conclusion that forms part of the reasoning called into question by the argument;" is undoubtedly correct ........................ Out of options D and E, i think this part is just another conclusion and not the main conclusion. The main conclusion of the argument has to be something on the lines of "Hence the rumors that the bank faced impending financial collapse might as well be true."
That makes E the winner. But of course, with the OA out, reasoning gets a little more focussed :D
yeah..if this appears in exam def i am gonna get a miss
One of the limiting factors in human physical performance is the amount of oxygen that is absorbed by the muscles from the bloodstream. Accordingly, entrepreneurs have begun selling at gymnasiums and health clubs bottles of drinking water, labeled "SuperOXY," that has extra oxygen dissolved in the water. Such water would be useless in improving physical performance, however, since the only way to get oxygen into the bloodstream so that it can be absorbed bye the muscles is through the lungs.
Which of the following, if true, would serve the same function in the argument as the statement in boldface?
A. the water lost in exercising can be replaced with ordinary tap water B. the amount of oxygen in the blood of people who are exercising is already more than the muscle can absorb C. world-class athletes turn in record performance without such water D. frequent physical exercise increases the body's ability to take in and use oxygen E. lack of oxygen is not the only factor limiting human physical performance
One of the limiting factors in human physical performance is the amount of oxygen that is absorbed by the muscles from the bloodstream. Accordingly, entrepreneurs have begun selling at gymnasiums and health clubs bottles of drinking water, labeled "SuperOXY," that has extra oxygen dissolved in the water. Such water would be useless in improving physical performance, however, since the only way to get oxygen into the bloodstream so that it can be absorbed bye the muscles is through the lungs.
Which of the following, if true, would serve the same function in the argument as the statement in boldface?
A. the water lost in exercising can be replaced with ordinary tap water B. the amount of oxygen in the blood of people who are exercising is already more than the muscle can absorb C. world-class athletes turn in record performance without such water D. frequent physical exercise increases the body's ability to take in and use oxygen E. lack of oxygen is not the only factor limiting human physical performance
Neo
this one should be B. It gives another reason why bottled water may be useless.
One of the limiting factors in human physical performance is the amount of oxygen that is absorbed by the muscles from the bloodstream. Accordingly, entrepreneurs have begun selling at gymnasiums and health clubs bottles of drinking water, labeled "SuperOXY," that has extra oxygen dissolved in the water. Such water would be useless in improving physical performance, however, since the only way to get oxygen into the bloodstream so that it can be absorbed bye the muscles is through the lungs.
Which of the following, if true, would serve the same function in the argument as the statement in boldface?
A. the water lost in exercising can be replaced with ordinary tap water B. the amount of oxygen in the blood of people who are exercising is already more than the muscle can absorb C. world-class athletes turn in record performance without such water D. frequent physical exercise increases the body's ability to take in and use oxygen E. lack of oxygen is not the only factor limiting human physical performance
Neo
It should be (B)
a. it doesn't refute the above claim. b. If people who are exercicsing already have enough oxygen that they can absorb, the new water bottle will not be of any use. c. it doesn't mean that world-class athletes can't improve further d. same as above e. Though lack of oxygen is not the only factor, using proper amount of oxygen can certainly help improving the performance.
a. it doesn't refute the above claim. b. If people who are exercicsing already have enough oxygen that they can absorb, the new water bottle will not be of any use. c. it doesn't mean that world-class athletes can't improve further d. same as above e. Though lack of oxygen is not the only factor, using proper amount of oxygen can certainly help improving the performance.
what's the OA :smile:
I agree with you but the OA doesnt
I checked and rechecked ..The given OA is A !! and again no explanation found !!
The above two are sure a bouncer qns if OA were to be assumed correct.
One of the limiting factors in human physical performance is the amount of oxygen that is absorbed by the muscles from the bloodstream. Accordingly, entrepreneurs have begun selling at gymnasiums and health clubs bottles of drinking water, labeled "SuperOXY," that has extra oxygen dissolved in the water. Such water would be useless in improving physical performance, however, since the only way to get oxygen into the bloodstream so that it can be absorbed bye the muscles is through the lungs.
Which of the following, if true, would serve the same function in the argument as the statement in boldface?
A. the water lost in exercising can be replaced with ordinary tap water B. the amount of oxygen in the blood of people who are exercising is already more than the muscle can absorb C. world-class athletes turn in record performance without such water D. frequent physical exercise increases the body's ability to take in and use oxygen E. lack of oxygen is not the only factor limiting human physical performance
Neo
The argument first states a fact then entrepreneurs use of the fact and a consideration against the entrepreneurs use. Since the second one is a consideration the choice should also be a consideration by stating such water is useless because oxygen ---- absorbed -----through lungs now this gives the clue about the first consideration. The first consideration clearly confirms that SuperOXY will not be supplying oxygen to blood stream if so the first consideration would be false and unfounded. The second consideration (from the choices) should perform a function similar to the the one already stated without assuming anything extra. A. This looks like a consideration against the SUPEROXY B. This states oxygen is already present in enough quantity but the first consideration already says SUPEROXY will not be able to push any more oxygen into blood stream so this cannot perform anything extra against SUPEROXY use C. States about a specific case of world-class performers D. Not a consideration against SuperOXY and frequent exercise looks out of scope E. Out scope consideration should be against use of SUPEROXY
A very tough question indeed. Neo thanks for posting this.
The argument first states a fact then entrepreneurs use of the fact and a consideration against the entrepreneurs use. Since the second one is a consideration the choice should also be a consideration by stating such water is useless because oxygen ---- absorbed -----through lungs now this gives the clue about the first consideration. The first consideration clearly confirms that SuperOXY will not be supplying oxygen to blood stream if so the first consideration would be false and unfounded. The second consideration (from the choices) should perform a function similar to the the one already stated without assuming anything extra. A. This looks like a consideration against the SUPEROXY B. This states oxygen is already present in enough quantity but the first consideration already says SUPEROXY will not be able to push any more oxygen into blood stream so this cannot perform anything extra against SUPEROXY use C. States about a specific case of world-class performers D. Not a consideration against SuperOXY and frequent exercise looks out of scope E. Out scope consideration should be against use of SUPEROXY
A very tough question indeed. Neo thanks for posting this.
Shiva,
Just am checking, whether the statement "the water lost in exercising can be replaced with ordinary tap water" is against SUPEROXY. SUPEROXY claims to improve physical perfomance. Tap water used for replacing water lost in the body doesn't seem to challenge SUPEROXY as it claims to improve performace NOT by replacing lost water but by bringing more oxygen to bloodstream.
Just am checking, whether the statement "the water lost in exercising can be replaced with ordinary tap water" is against SUPEROXY. SUPEROXY claims to improve physical perfomance. Tap water used for replacing water lost in the body doesn't seem to challenge SUPEROXY as it claims to improve performace NOT by replacing lost water but by bringing more oxygen to bloodstream.
what do you think?
Phalanx, I think the argument doesn't state anything that indicates superoxy calims that it brings more oxygen to bloodstream. But it simply states a fact and says super oxy has more disolved oxygen in its water. And then states a considerations after it states "Such water would be useless in improving physical performance" so considerations should be something about saying that it is indeed useless. It is already know that it doesn't help in getting oxygen into blood. And we have to select from the choices a consideration that performs the same function. Since it is already know from the first consideration that it is useless in putting oxygen into blood I think the choice should point some other consideration that also proves superoxy is useless. If superoxy is not useful in pushing oxygen into blood or in another way concerning physical activity. Ofcourse I am guide by OA and there can be a better explanation. I hope this helps
Business Consultant: Some corporations shun the use of executive titles because they fear that the use of titles indicating position in the corporation tends to inhibit communication up and down the corporate hierarchy. Since an executive who uses a title is treated with more respect by outsiders, however, use of a title can facilitate an executives dealings with external businesses. Clearly, corporations should adopt the compromise of encouraging their executives to use their corporate titles externally but not internally, since even if it is widely known that the corporations executives use titles outside their organization, this knowledge does not by itself inhibit communication within the corporation.
In the consultants reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first describes a strategy that has been adopted to avoid a certain problem; the second presents a drawback to that strategy. B. The first describes a strategy that has been adopted to avoid a certain problem; the second is a consideration raised to call into question the effectiveness of that strategy as a means of achieving that goal. C. The first describes a strategy that has been adopted to avoid a certain problem; the second is a consideration the consultant raises in questioning the significance of that problem. D. The first is part of an explanation that the consultant offers for a certain phenomenon; the second is that phenomenon. E. The first describes a policy for which the consultant seeks to provide a justification; the second is a consideration the consultant raises as part of that justification.
Business Consultant: Some corporations shun the use of executive titles because they fear that the use of titles indicating position in the corporation tends to inhibit communication up and down the corporate hierarchy. Since an executive who uses a title is treated with more respect by outsiders, however, use of a title can facilitate an executives dealings with external businesses. Clearly, corporations should adopt the compromise of encouraging their executives to use their corporate titles externally but not internally, since even if it is widely known that the corporations executives use titles outside their organization, this knowledge does not by itself inhibit communication within the corporation.
In the consultants reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
A. The first describes a strategy that has been adopted to avoid a certain problem; the second presents a drawback to that strategy. B. The first describes a strategy that has been adopted to avoid a certain problem; the second is a consideration raised to call into question the effectiveness of that strategy as a means of achieving that goal. C. The first describes a strategy that has been adopted to avoid a certain problem; the second is a consideration the consultant raises in questioning the significance of that problem. D. The first is part of an explanation that the consultant offers for a certain phenomenon; the second is that phenomenon. E. The first describes a policy for which the consultant seeks to provide a justification; the second is a consideration the consultant raises as part of that justification.
Hmmm I can rule out D and E E. The second cannot be a part of the justification of the first one D. I don't think either one is a phenomenon because the author uses words "some" and "can be" Between A,B, and C I can rule out B as the second can't be a consideration against "that goal"(goal of first is communication inside the organization) second one talks about a different thing Between A and C. I think A is better because a compromise can be made between an advantage and a draw back.Also author's tone doesn't suggest he is questioning the significance as he goes on to say a compromise has to be made so he has to view first one as useful My answer is A.
and again no explanation found !!
and there can be a better explanation. I hope this helps