When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf and are then asked whether they can hear the hypnotist, they reply, "No." Some theorists try to explain this result by arguing that the selves of hypnotized subjects are dissociated into separate parts, and that the part that is deaf is dissociated from the part that replies.
Which of the following challenges indicates the most serious weakness in the attempted explanation described above?
(A) Why does the part that replies not answer, "Yes"?
(B) Why are the observed facts in need of any special explanation?
(C) Why do the subjects appear to accept the hypnotist's suggestion that they are deaf?
(D) Why do hypnotized subjects all respond the same way in the situation described?
(E) Why are the separate parts of the self the same for all subjects?
dear instructors/experts,
I fail to understand the logic link between premise and conclusion,
anyone can help?
how the theorists arrived at the conclusion ? hard to figure out the link of the premise and conclusion
thanks a lot
have a nice day
>_~
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
CR -- deaf part and reply part
This topic has expert replies
-
GMATGuruNY
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 15539
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
- Location: New York, NY
- Thanked: 13060 times
- Followed by:1906 members
- GMAT Score:790
Check my post here:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/og-12-qs-63- ... 80297.html
https://www.beatthegmat.com/og-12-qs-63- ... 80297.html
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.
As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.
For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.
As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.
For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Hi, GuruNYGMATGuruNY wrote:Check my post here:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/og-12-qs-63- ... 80297.html
here is your explanation
I am still confused:GMATGuruNY wrote: The argument concludes that the HEARING PART of the brain is disassociated from -- and thus cannot transfer information to -- the REPLYING PART of the brain.
Implication:
The REPLYING PART of the brain must be UNAWARE of questions heard by the HEARING PART, since the hearing part cannot transfer information to the replying part.
Thus, in concluding that the replying part is disassociated from the hearing part, the theorists assume that the following is true:
When hypnotized subjects respond to a question, the response comes from the HEARING PART.
The correct answer choice will attack this assumption.
Rephrase the answer choices as simple statements.
A, rephrased as a statement:
The part that responds does not answer "Yes."
By definition, the hearing part CAN HEAR.
Thus, when the hearing part is asked whether it can hear, it should answer YES.
That the hearing part does NOT answer "yes" suggests that the response from each subject does NOT come from the hearing part of the brain, WEAKENING the theorists' assumption.
The correct answer is A.
E, rephrased as a statement:
The separate parts of the self are the same for all subjects.
This answer choice does not weaken the assumption that the response from each subject comes from the hearing part.
Eliminate E.
the logic btw these two sentences confused me a lotGMATGuruNY wrote:since the hearing part cannot transfer information to the replying part.
Thus, in concluding that the replying part is disassociated from the hearing part.
both sentences state the same meaning, if they are the same meaning, the logic is not a real logic, right?
I also doubt that the assumption
works btw these two sentence?When hypnotized subjects respond to a question, the response comes from the HEARING PART
I thought this question many times, I am still confused:
1/ deaf part cannot response,
2/ I understand any answer comes from hearing part,
3/ no matter "yes" or "no" , as long as response, it must come from hearing part
4/ thus , if response, only can imply responses from hearing, it is difficult to conclude that hearing part is dissociated from reply part, no matter "yes" or "no"
desiring your help
thanks a lot
have a nice day
>_~
-
GMATGuruNY
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 15539
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
- Location: New York, NY
- Thanked: 13060 times
- Followed by:1906 members
- GMAT Score:790
Let one of the hypnotized subjects be John.zoe wrote:I thought this question many times, I am still confused:
Let John's brain be divided into two parts: a RED PART and a BLUE PART.
The hypnotist tells the RED PART that John is deaf, with the result that the BLUE PART still believes that John can hear.
Since the red part is deaf, it cannot respond to any questions.
Thus, when John is asked whether he can hear, the response must come from the BLUE PART.
Since the BLUE PART believes that John can hear, the BLUE PART should answer YES when asked whether John can hear.
Answer choice A:
Why does the blue part not answer YES?
Answer:
The BLUE PART must be connected to the RED PART, the part that thinks that John is deaf.
Thus, the conclusion that the blue part and the red part are disassociated from each other is WEAKENED.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.
As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.
For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.
As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.
For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3
thanks GurnNY,GMATGuruNY wrote:Let one of the hypnotized subjects be John.zoe wrote:I thought this question many times, I am still confused:
Let John's brain be divided into two parts: a RED PART and a BLUE PART.
The hypnotist tells the RED PART that John is deaf, with the result that the BLUE PART still believes that John can hear.
Since the red part is deaf, it cannot respond to any questions.
Thus, when John is asked whether he can hear, the response must come from the BLUE PART.
Since the BLUE PART believes that John can hear, the BLUE PART should answer YES when asked whether John can hear.
Answer choice A:
Why does the blue part not answer YES?
Answer:
The BLUE PART must be connected to the RED PART, the part that thinks that John is deaf.
Thus, the conclusion that the blue part and the red part are disassociated from each other is WEAKENED.
it seems to be clear after reading this thread, but I am not sure whether I really got the idea. please point out my fault.
based on your imagine, I go back to this case.
John's brain is divided into hearing part and deaf part.
under normal condition, hearing part answers only "YES" to reply, deaf part keeps silence and won't answer anything.
it must be from hearing part if answer only "YES",
it must be from deaf part if silence.
if must be from neither hearing part nor deaf part if answer "NO"
as premise says,
the answer is "NO", so get the idea that reply part hearing part and deaf part are independent each other,
so the conclusion is that the part that is deaf is dissociated from the part that replies.
Answer choice A,
if get answer "YES", then the deaf part must take use of hearing part under unawareness, so it imply that deaf part and hearing exchange information, and transfer to reply,
we can see that deaf transfer information to reply indirectly, deaf part and reply are not independent, they transfer information indirectly
so A weakens the independent relationship. Am I right?
an idea occurred moment, please help to check whether my reasoning is correct
only "YES" can be the answer through hearing part,
so "NO" is an incorrect condition/source, the stimulus's conclusion is based on an incorrect condition/source, that imply the conclusion is problematic,
if weaken , we just point the incorrect condition/source.
I am desiring your confirm.
thanks a lot
have a nice day
>_~
