OG 11 Question

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 231
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 2:45 am
Thanked: 5 times
Followed by:1 members

OG 11 Question

by winnerhere » Sat May 07, 2011 9:54 pm
The earliest Mayan pottery found at Colha, in Belize, is about 3,000 years old. Recently, however, 4,500-year-old stone agricultural implements were unearthed at Colha. These implements resemble Mayan stone implements of a much later period, also found at Colha. Moreover, the implements' designs are strikingly different from the designs of stone implements produced by other cultures known to have inhabited the area in prehistoric times. Therefore, there were surely Mayan settlements in Colha 4,500 years ago.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) Ceramic ware is not known to have been used by the Mayan people to make agricultural implements.
(B) Carbon-dating of corn pollen in Colha indicates that agriculture began there around 4,500 years ago.
(C) Archaeological evidence indicates that some of the oldest stone implements found at Colha were used to cut away vegetation after controlled burning of trees to open areas of swampland for cultivation.
(D) Successor cultures at a given site often adopt the style of agricultural implements used by earlier inhabitants of the same site.
(E) Many religious and social institutions of the Mayan people who inhabited Colha 3,000 years ago relied on a highly developed system of agricultural symbols.

OA : Later

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1101
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2011 7:26 am
Thanked: 47 times
Followed by:13 members
GMAT Score:640

by HSPA » Sat May 07, 2011 10:24 pm
IMO D
First take: 640 (50M, 27V) - RC needs 300% improvement
Second take: coming soon..
Regards,
HSPA.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 231
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 2:45 am
Thanked: 5 times
Followed by:1 members

by winnerhere » Sat May 07, 2011 10:40 pm
Explanation please :)

Legendary Member
Posts: 2330
Joined: Fri Jan 15, 2010 5:14 am
Thanked: 56 times
Followed by:26 members

by mundasingh123 » Sat May 07, 2011 11:23 pm
Ans D
I Seek Explanations Not Answers

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 231
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 2:45 am
Thanked: 5 times
Followed by:1 members

by winnerhere » Sun May 08, 2011 10:15 am
Thanks for the reply guys. But my doubt is about the following sentence in the stimulus

"Moreover, the implements' designs are strikingly different from the designs of stone implements produced by other cultures known to have inhabited the area in prehistoric times."

If the designs are different from the designs of stone implements produced by otehr cultures known to have inhabited that area in prehistoric times - how can we say that the mayans might have learnt the style from the previous cultures.

Legendary Member
Posts: 1112
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 11:16 am
Thanked: 77 times
Followed by:49 members

by atulmangal » Sun May 08, 2011 6:33 pm
My 2 cents:

I think the argument flows like this:

The premises suggest that the Mayans used to live in Colha,

1) 3000 years ago (Premise given: The earliest Mayan pottery found at Colha, in Belize, is about 3,000 years old.)

2) before 4500 years ago, for ex may be 5000 or 6000 years ago (Premise given: implements resemble Mayan stone implements of a much later period, also found at Colha. )

Now if u notice, there is a time gap of 1500 years b/w 4500 years ago and 3000 years ago. The author on the basis of some piece of info given in argument actually concludes that

Mayans also lived in that time Gap (4500-3000) ---> this is actually the rephrase of conclusion

Seems confusing, try to understand in this way, suppose Mayans were living there 5000 years ago, they lived there for 500 years and then some other civilization attack on Mayans and forced all Mayans to move to some other place, and then around 3000 ago Mayans returned to Colha....seems like a history inspired story but it just a way to get the feel. Now this actually means, the Mayan's are not living in Colha (4500-3000), they are living in some other place but the author based on some premise concludes that they are living in that period too.

The premise given in support of the above conclusion is:

1) Implements resemble Mayan stone implements of a much later period (before 4500), also found at Colha.

2) The implements' designs are strikingly different from the designs of stone implements produced by other cultures known to have inhabited the area in prehistoric times.

So we need to weaken the above conclusion and in order to do that we can weaken the supporting premise. What if the civilization that attacked on Mayans, learns the way Mayans constructed their agricultural equipments and copied the same. Then it is proved that its not Mayans who are living there but the other civilization using the same equipments copied from Mayans.

This is what the OA is reflecting.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 8:49 am
Location: Delhi
Thanked: 6 times

by ranjeet75 » Sun May 08, 2011 8:59 pm
[quote="winnerhere"]The earliest Mayan pottery found at Colha, in Belize, is about 3,000 years old. Recently, however, 4,500-year-old stone agricultural implements were unearthed at Colha. These implements resemble Mayan stone implements of a much later period, also found at Colha. Moreover, the implements' designs are strikingly different from the designs of stone implements produced by other cultures known to have inhabited the area in prehistoric times. Therefore, there were surely Mayan settlements in Colha 4,500 years ago.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) Ceramic ware is not known to have been used by the Mayan people to make agricultural implements. - [color=red]Out of scope as ceramic ware has notning to do.[/color]
(B) Carbon-dating of corn pollen in Colha indicates that agriculture began there around 4,500 years ago. - [color=red]We are concerned abt agriculture implements of Mayan not of any other, Agriculture was started by any other[/color]
(C) Archaeological evidence indicates that some of the oldest stone implements found at Colha were used to cut away vegetation after controlled burning of trees to open areas of swampland for cultivation. - [color=red]What is the use is immaterial[/color]
(D) Successor cultures at a given site often adopt the style of agricultural implements used by earlier inhabitants of the same site. - [color=blue]Only this is left out as contender. Moreover, if Mayan had used the style of their predecessor then Mayan is not more than 3000 years - It weakens[/color]
(E) Many religious and social institutions of the Mayan people who inhabited Colha 3,000 years ago relied on a highly developed system of agricultural symbols. - [color=red]Talks abt only 3000 years ago[/color]

OA : Later[/quote]

Legendary Member
Posts: 1112
Joined: Sat Feb 26, 2011 11:16 am
Thanked: 77 times
Followed by:49 members

by atulmangal » Sun May 08, 2011 9:06 pm
winnerhere wrote:Thanks for the reply guys. But my doubt is about the following sentence in the stimulus

"Moreover, the implements' designs are strikingly different from the designs of stone implements produced by other cultures known to have inhabited the area in prehistoric times."

If the designs are different from the designs of stone implements produced by otehr cultures known to have inhabited that area in prehistoric times - how can we say that the mayans might have learnt the style from the previous cultures.
I believe its actually the others who learned from Mayan's not Mayan's who learned from other cultures.

User avatar
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

by GMATGuruNY » Tue May 10, 2011 5:35 am
winnerhere wrote:The earliest Mayan pottery found at Colha, in Belize, is about 3,000 years old. Recently, however, 4,500-year-old stone agricultural implements were unearthed at Colha. These implements resemble Mayan stone implements of a much later period, also found at Colha. Moreover, the implements' designs are strikingly different from the designs of stone implements produced by other cultures known to have inhabited the area in prehistoric times. Therefore, there were surely Mayan settlements in Colha 4,500 years ago.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) Ceramic ware is not known to have been used by the Mayan people to make agricultural implements.
(B) Carbon-dating of corn pollen in Colha indicates that agriculture began there around 4,500 years ago.
(C) Archaeological evidence indicates that some of the oldest stone implements found at Colha were used to cut away vegetation after controlled burning of trees to open areas of swampland for cultivation.
(D) Successor cultures at a given site often adopt the style of agricultural implements used by earlier inhabitants of the same site.
(E) Many religious and social institutions of the Mayan people who inhabited Colha 3,000 years ago relied on a highly developed system of agricultural symbols.

OA : Later
To weaken the conclusion, attack the assumption.

Assumption: Because the 4500 year-old implements resemble Mayan implements of a later period, the Mayans must have made the 4500 year-old implements.
The correct answer will suggest that the Mayans did not make the 4500 year-old implements.

Answer choice D does just what we need.
It suggests that another culture made the 4500 year-old implements and that the Mayans -- the successor culture -- adopted the style of these implements.
If the Mayans adopted the style of this earlier culture, then there is no proof that the Mayans were in Colha 4500 years ago.

The correct answer is D.
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

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 698
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2015 12:12 am
Location: Noida, India
Thanked: 32 times
Followed by:26 members
GMAT Score:740

by richachampion » Sun Jan 03, 2016 2:54 am
GMATGuruNY wrote:
winnerhere wrote:The earliest Mayan pottery found at Colha, in Belize, is about 3,000 years old. Recently, however, 4,500-year-old stone agricultural implements were unearthed at Colha. These implements resemble Mayan stone implements of a much later period, also found at Colha. Moreover, the implements' designs are strikingly different from the designs of stone implements produced by other cultures known to have inhabited the area in prehistoric times. Therefore, there were surely Mayan settlements in Colha 4,500 years ago.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

(A) Ceramic ware is not known to have been used by the Mayan people to make agricultural implements.
(B) Carbon-dating of corn pollen in Colha indicates that agriculture began there around 4,500 years ago.
(C) Archaeological evidence indicates that some of the oldest stone implements found at Colha were used to cut away vegetation after controlled burning of trees to open areas of swampland for cultivation.
(D) Successor cultures at a given site often adopt the style of agricultural implements used by earlier inhabitants of the same site.
(E) Many religious and social institutions of the Mayan people who inhabited Colha 3,000 years ago relied on a highly developed system of agricultural symbols.

OA : Later
To weaken the conclusion, attack the assumption.

Assumption: Because the 4500 year-old implements resemble Mayan implements of a later period, the Mayans must have made the 4500 year-old implements.
The correct answer will suggest that the Mayans did not make the 4500 year-old implements.

Answer choice D does just what we need.
It suggests that another culture made the 4500 year-old implements and that the Mayans -- the successor culture -- adopted the style of these implements.
If the Mayans adopted the style of this earlier culture, then there is no proof that the Mayans were in Colha 4500 years ago.

The correct answer is D.
Sir,

What you have stated in Option D can be visualized in one more technicality i.e. Option D perfectly breaks the Causality. Is my Opinion of Causality Correct?

Conclusion: Therefore, there were surely Mayan settlements in Colha 4,500 years ago.
(D) Successor cultures at a given site often adopt the style of agricultural implements used by earlier inhabitants of the same site.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 698
Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2015 12:12 am
Location: Noida, India
Thanked: 32 times
Followed by:26 members
GMAT Score:740

by richachampion » Sun Apr 03, 2016 3:26 pm
I think Graduate Management Aptitude Council is testing the concept of causality here.

however, 4,500-year-old stone agricultural implements were unearthed at Colha. These implements resemble Mayan stone implements of a much later period, also found at Colha. Moreover, the implements' designs are strikingly different from the designs of stone implements produced by other cultures known to have inhabited the area in prehistoric times. Therefore, there were surely Mayan settlements in Colha 4,500 years ago.

Causal: Therefore, there were surely Mayan settlements in Colha 4,500 years ago.
Reason: 4,500-year-old stone agricultural implements were unearthed at Colha were from Mayans because no co existing culture created the same design Thus/Therefore -
there were surely Mayan settlements in Colha 4,500 years ago

If we can break this causality we can weaken the conclusion.

(D) Successor cultures at a given site often adopt the style of agricultural implements used by earlier inhabitants of the same site.

The Option D actually does that by stating that later Mayan civilization was inspired by some other culture/civilization that existed prior to it.

In short civilization 4500 years ago were not Mayans, but some one else.

Does this all make sense?

Legendary Member
Posts: 944
Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 8:21 am
Thanked: 8 times
Followed by:5 members

by RBBmba@2014 » Fri Apr 08, 2016 8:25 am
Hi Verbal Experts,
Could you please shed some light on option A ? What EXACTLY the issue is with A ?

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2131
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2014 9:26 am
Location: https://martymurraycoaching.com/
Thanked: 955 times
Followed by:140 members
GMAT Score:800

by MartyMurray » Fri May 27, 2016 9:56 pm
RBBmba@2014 wrote:Hi Verbal Experts,
Could you please shed some light on option A ? What EXACTLY the issue is with A ?
A is a trap answer.

GMAT critical reasoning is partly a test of vision. The question you could ask yourself is "What do I need to SEE in order to understand why A is not correct?"

The argument says "The earliest Mayan pottery found at Colha, in Belize, is about 3,000 years old." So, yes, pottery is discussed, but that's the end of the pottery discussion.

Next the argument discusses stone implements. "Recently, however, 4,500-year-old stone agricultural implements were unearthed at Colha. These implements resemble Mayan stone implements of a much later period ..."

Maybe at this point you see why A is not correct. I could further explain why, but for the purposes of developing the vision you need for totally rocking the GMAT probably you are better off completing the answer to your question yourself.
Marty Murray
Perfect Scoring Tutor With Over a Decade of Experience
MartyMurrayCoaching.com
Contact me at [email protected] for a free consultation.

Legendary Member
Posts: 944
Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 8:21 am
Thanked: 8 times
Followed by:5 members

by RBBmba@2014 » Sat May 28, 2016 10:27 am
Hi Marty,
Undoubtedly, Option D appears to be more convincing to be the OA.

As for A, here's my doubt on A:
if A is true then doesn't it cast doubt on the CONCLUSION that there were surely Mayan settlements in Colha 4,500 years ago ? I mean, if Mayan didn't use these stone implements for agriculture then I guess, we can't really say that the Mayan made those 4,500-year-old stone agricultural implements or they lived 4,500 ago!

Opposite thought that I've about A as an INCORRECT choice -

The ARGUMENT says that the 4500 year-old stone implements (for agricultural purpose) resemble Mayan stone implements of a later period (and it's never mentioned in the ARGUMENT that the Mayan used such stone implements for agricultural purpose or so). Therefore, it's IRRELEVANT whether Mayan used such stone implements for agricultural or any other purpose.

The point is whether Mayan made such stone implements 4,500 years ago; in other words, whether Mayan had any existence in Colha 4,500 years ago ? Option A doesn't EVEN fall in this line,addressing this issue that there were surely Mayan settlements in Colha 4,500 years ago; whereas D clearly WEAKEN the CONCLUSION that there were surely Mayan settlements in Colha 4,500 years ago.

So, as you can see I'm still confused. Please let me know your feedback!

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2131
Joined: Mon Feb 03, 2014 9:26 am
Location: https://martymurraycoaching.com/
Thanked: 955 times
Followed by:140 members
GMAT Score:800

by MartyMurray » Sat May 28, 2016 1:34 pm
RBBmba@2014 wrote:Hi Marty,
Undoubtedly, Option D appears to be more convincing to be the OA.

As for A, here's my doubt on A:
if A is true then doesn't it cast doubt on the CONCLUSION that there were surely Mayan settlements in Colha 4,500 years ago ? I mean, if Mayan didn't use these stone implements for agriculture then I guess, we can't really say that the Mayan made those 4,500-year-old stone agricultural implements or they lived 4,500 ago!

So, as you can see I'm still confused. Please let me know your feedback!
You have totally missed the point for some reason.

Here is why A is basically irrelevant.

The argument uses the discovery of STONE implements as evidence.

A is about not about stone implements. A is about CERAMIC implements. Ceramic implements are not stone implements.

Stone implements are made from stone. Ceramic implements are made from some kind of material that is formed and then heated to render it hard.

So A is about something different from what the argument is about.

To rock CR you have to note pretty much every word. Miss the fact that the argument uses one word and an answer choice uses another and you are doomed, DOOOOOMED. LOL

Enjoy the game!!!
Marty Murray
Perfect Scoring Tutor With Over a Decade of Experience
MartyMurrayCoaching.com
Contact me at [email protected] for a free consultation.