| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
kajcha
GMAT Destroyer!
Joined: 28 Aug 2007
Posts: 321
Thanks given: 0
Thanked 0 times in 0 posts
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 10:45 am Post subject: 1000 CRs - Comedians |
 |
|
All of the best comedians have had unhappy childhoods. Yet, many people who have had happy childhoods are good comedians, and some good comedians who have had miserably unhappy childhoods are happy adults.
If the statements in the passage are true, which one of the following CANNOT be true?
(A) The proportion of good comedians who had unhappy childhoods is greater than the proportion of the best comedians who did.
(B) Some good comedians have had unhappy childhoods and are unhappy adults.
(C) Most of the best comedians are happy adults.
(D) More good comedians have had unhappy childhoods than have had happy childhoods.
(E) The proportion of comedians who are happy adults is higher than the proportion who are unhappy adults. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
mschling52
Really wants to Beat The GMAT!
Joined: 18 Sep 2006
Posts: 104
Thanks given: 0
Thanked 1 times in 1 posts
Location: OH
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 12:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think it's A.
The passage states that ALL of the best comedians had unhappy childhoods and that SOME good comedians had happy childhoods.
Since the proportion of the best comedians who had unhappy childhoods is 100%, it is not possible for the proportion of good comedians with unhappy childhoods to be any higher. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kajcha
GMAT Destroyer!
Joined: 28 Aug 2007
Posts: 321
Thanks given: 0
Thanked 0 times in 0 posts
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2007 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Yeah, that's the one OA is A |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sibbineni
Really wants to Beat The GMAT!
Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 223
Thanks given: 0
Thanked 15 times in 14 posts
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 11:22 am Post subject: |
|
|
IMO (A)
premise 1: All of the best comedians have had unhappy childhoods.
100% of the best comedians have unhappy childhoods.
Premise 2: Some of the good comedians have had miserably unhappy childhoods
Not 100% of the good comedians have unhappy childhoods
so the proportion of best comedians who had unhappy child hoods is > than good comedians |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
simplyjat
GMAT Destroyer!
Joined: 27 Dec 2007
Posts: 422
Thanks given: 3
Thanked 29 times in 29 posts
Location: Hyderabad, India
Test Date: May 20, 2008
Target GMAT Score: 770
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 27, 2008 11:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Are these type questions asked in GMAT? I am having a belief that these questions are out of scope for GMAT...
_________________
simplyjat |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Stuart Kovinsky
GMAT Instructor
Joined: 08 Jan 2008
Posts: 1091
Thanks given: 0
Thanked 163 times in 151 posts
Location: Toronto
GMAT Score: 800
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2008 1:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sibbineni wrote: | IMO (A)
premise 1: All of the best comedians have had unhappy childhoods.
100% of the best comedians have unhappy childhoods.
Premise 2: Some of the good comedians have had miserably unhappy childhoods
Not 100% of the good comedians have unhappy childhoods
so the proportion of best comedians who had unhappy child hoods is > than good comedians |
(A) is correct, but one small mistake in this reasoning.
"Some" literally means "at least one" and has no upper limit.
So, "some of the good comedians have had miserably unhappy childhoods" means that "at least one good comedian has had a miserably unhappy childhood". It's actually possible that ALL of them were miserably unhappy.
So, as Mschling pointed out, since 100% of the best were unhappy, it's impossible that a GREATER proportion of the good were unhappy, since there's no proportion greater than 100%.
_________________
Stuart Kovinsky, B.A. LL.B.
Academic Co-ordinator
Kaplan Test Prep & Admissions
Toronto Office
1-800-KAP-TEST
Learn more about me |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
