Critical Reasoning

Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open to any user) would always be used less carefully than private grazing land. Each rancher would be tempted to overuse common land because the benefits would accrue to the individuals, while the costs of reduced land quality that results from overuse would be spread among all users. But a study comparing 217 million acres of common grazing land with 433 million acres of private grazing land showed that the common land was in better condition.

Which of the following, if true and known by the ranchers, would best help explain the results of the study?

(A) With private grazing land, both the costs and the benefits of overuse fall to the individual user.
(B) The cost in reduced land quality that is attributable to any individual user is less easily measured with common land than it is with private land.
(C) An individual who overuses common grazing land might be able to achieve higher returns than other uses can, with the result that he or she would obtain a competitive advantage.
(D) If one user of common land overuses it even slightly, the other users are likely to do so even more, with the consequence that the costs to each user outweigh the benefits.
(E) There are more acres of grazing hand held privately than there are held in common.


Not able to understand this. Verbal experts - could you please share your detail analysis ?

RBBmba@2014 wrote:Hardin argued that grazing land held in common(that is, open to any user) would always be used less carefully than private grazing land. Each rancher would be tempted to overuse common land because the benefits would accrue to the individuals, while the costs of reduced land quality that results from overuse would be spread among all users. But a study comparing 217 million acres of common grazing land with 433 million acres of private grazing land showed that the common land was in better condition.

Which of the following, if true and known by the ranchers, would best help explain the results of the study?

(A) With private grazing land, both the costs and the benefits of overuse fall to the individual user.
(B) The cost in reduced land quality that is attributable to any individual user is less easily measured with common land than it is with private land.
(C) An individual who overuses common grazing land might be able to achieve higher returns than other uses can, with the result that he or she would obtain a competitive advantage.
(D) If one user of common land overuses it even slightly, the other users are likely to do so even more, with the consequence that the costs to each user outweigh the benefits.
(E) There are more acres of grazing hand held privately than there are held in common.

Fact 1: According to Hardin, common land would be used less carefully than private land because the benefits would accrue to the individuals, while the costs would be spread among all users.
Fact 2: A study showed that common land was actually in better condition than private land.

The correct answer must explain why Hardin's prediction was wrong.
According to D, if ONE user of common land overuses it EVEN SLIGHTLY, the costs to each user outweigh the benefits.
Thus, users of common land have a clear incentive NOT to overuse it, explaining why common land was found to be in better condition than private land.

The correct answer is D.

GMATGuruNY wrote: Fact 1: According to Hardin, common land would be used less carefully than private land because the benefits would accrue to the individuals, while the costs would be spread among all users.
Fact 2: A study showed that common land was actually in better condition than private land.

The correct answer must explain why Hardin's prediction was wrong.
According to D, if ONE user of common land overuses it EVEN SLIGHTLY, the costs to each user outweigh the benefits.
Thus, users of common land have a clear incentive NOT to overuse it, explaining why common land was found to be in better condition than private land.

The correct answer is D.

Hi Mitch,
Thanks for your reply.
So,this question intends to find out "why Hardin's prediction was wrong" - hence why common land was in better condition than private land. Right ?

And per option D, the reason for the above is NOT overusing the common land in order to not losing out benefits.

Please let me know whether my understanding is correct and then accordingly I'd come up with my next query related to this passage.

Look forward to hear from you Sir!

RBBmba@2014 wrote: Hi Mitch,
Thanks for your reply.
So,this question intends to find out "why Hardin's prediction was wrong" - hence why common land was in better condition than private land. Right ?

And per option D, the reason for the above is NOT overusing the common land in order to not losing out benefits.

Please let me know whether my understanding is correct and then accordingly I'd come up with my next query related to this passage.

Look forward to hear from you Sir!

Yes.
Hardin contended that each rancher would be tempted to overuse common land because the benefits would accrue to the individuals, while the costs of reduced land quality that results from overuse would be spread among all users.
But the study found that common land was in better condition than private land.
The correct answer choice must explain why common land was not overused.
According to D, every rancher knows the following:
If even one rancher overuses common land, then other ranchers are likely to overuse it EVEN MORE, with the result that the COSTS to each rancher OUTWEIGH the BENEFITS -- giving each rancher a clear reason NOT to overuse common land.

Thanks again Mitch for confirming that I got you right in this particular question.

Now if you see in OG Verbal Review 1, this passage includes another question (I'm referring to the Qs#65 in Verbal Review 1) which is as follows -

The answer to which of the following questions would be most useful in evaluating the significance, in relation to Hardin's claim, of the study described above?

And the CORRECT option is C : Was the Private land that was studied of comparable quality to the Common land before either was used for grazing ?

Now my point is both the correct options of Qs# 65 and Qs# 66 are favoring/supporting the result of the study i.e. why common land was in better condition than private land. This well could be. Right ? A conclusion can have more than one supporting evidences/assumptions, I think ?

Look forward to your reply Sir!

P.S: In Real GMAT, can we see two questions (or more than one question) together against one CR passage ? Then it might become confusing in test environment.

GMATGuruNY wrote:

RBBmba@2014 wrote: Hi Mitch,
Thanks for your reply.
So,this question intends to find out "why Hardin's prediction was wrong" - hence why common land was in better condition than private land. Right ?

And per option D, the reason for the above is NOT overusing the common land in order to not losing out benefits.

Please let me know whether my understanding is correct and then accordingly I'd come up with my next query related to this passage.

Look forward to hear from you Sir!

Yes.
Hardin contended that each rancher would be tempted to overuse common land because the benefits would accrue to the individuals, while the costs of reduced land quality that results from overuse would be spread among all users.
But the study found that common land was in better condition than private land.
The correct answer choice must explain why common land was not overused.
According to D, every rancher knows the following:
If even one rancher overuses common land, then other ranchers are likely to overuse it EVEN MORE, with the result that the COSTS to each rancher OUTWEIGH the BENEFITS -- giving each rancher a clear reason NOT to overuse common land.

Hi Mitch,
Awaiting your reply on my above post Sir...any update ?

Much thanks!

Look forward to hear from you.

RBBmba@2014 wrote:Thanks again Mitch for confirming that I got you right in this particular question.

Now if you see in OG Verbal Review 1, this passage includes another question (I'm referring to the Qs#65 in Verbal Review 1) which is as follows -

The answer to which of the following questions would be most useful in evaluating the significance, in relation to Hardin's claim, of the study described above?

And the CORRECT option is C : Was the Private land that was studied of comparable quality to the Common land before either was used for grazing ?

Now my point is both the correct options of Qs# 65 and Qs# 66 are favoring/supporting the result of the study i.e. why common land was in better condition than private land. This well could be. Right ? A conclusion can have more than one supporting evidences/assumptions, I think ?

The study found that common land was in better condition than private land.
This finding is not a conclusion but a FACT.
A fact does not need to be supported.
We are being asked not to support the finding but to EXPLAIN it:
Why was the common land in better condition than the private land?

The OA to CR66 in the OG for Verbal, 2nd edition offers one possible explanation: every rancher knows that the costs of overusing common land outweigh the benefits.
The OA to CR65 in the OG for Verbal, 1st edition suggests another possible explanation: the private land examined in the study was of poor quality before it was used for grazing, explaining why the common land found to be in better condition.

There could many reasons why the common land was found to be in better condition.
The OAs above offer two possible explanations.

P.S: In Real GMAT, can we see two questions (or more than one question) together against one CR passage ? Then it might become confusing in test environment.

When you take the GMAT, it is very unlikely that a CR passage will be accompanied by more than one question.

Thanks for clarifying.
Yes, it's a FACT and definitely NOT conclusion. Sorry for that misinterpretation!

Hi Verbal Experts,
Is there any CONCLUSION in this CR ?

Generally, in "Paradox CR", is CONCLUSION present ?

RBBmba@2014 wrote:Hi Verbal Experts,
Is there any CONCLUSION in this CR ?

Generally, in "Paradox CR", is CONCLUSION present ?

The typical structure of "Explain the Paradox" is to present two facts that, on the surface, seem incongruous. For example:

Fact 1: the profit margins on product 'x' are larger than the profit margins on product 'y.'

Fact 2: Davecorp insists on only selling product 'y.'

Notice there's no conclusion here. Just two seemingly contradictory facts. In explain questions, we're trying to understand why the facts are not actually contradictory.

DavidG@VeritasPrep wrote:

RBBmba@2014 wrote:Hi Verbal Experts,
Is there any CONCLUSION in this CR ?

Generally, in "Paradox CR", is CONCLUSION present ?

The typical structure of "Explain the Paradox" is to present two facts that, on the surface, seem incongruous. For example:

Fact 1: the profit margins on product 'x' are larger than the profit margins on product 'y.'

Fact 2: Davecorp insists on only selling product 'y.'

Notice there's no conclusion here. Just two seemingly contradictory facts. In explain questions, we're trying to understand why the facts are not actually contradictory.

So, basically we can say that GENERALLY, in a "Explain the Paradox" CR question, the ARGUMENT doesn't contain any CONCLUSION as such (as in this CR at hand)!

Right ?

RBBmba@2014 wrote:

DavidG@VeritasPrep wrote:

RBBmba@2014 wrote:Hi Verbal Experts,
Is there any CONCLUSION in this CR ?

Generally, in "Paradox CR", is CONCLUSION present ?

The typical structure of "Explain the Paradox" is to present two facts that, on the surface, seem incongruous. For example:

Fact 1: the profit margins on product 'x' are larger than the profit margins on product 'y.'

Fact 2: Davecorp insists on only selling product 'y.'

Notice there's no conclusion here. Just two seemingly contradictory facts. In explain questions, we're trying to understand why the facts are not actually contradictory.

So, basically we can say that GENERALLY, in a "Explain the Paradox" CR question, the ARGUMENT doesn't contain any CONCLUSION as such (as in this CR at hand)!

Right ?

Correct.