"Consumer advocate: it is generally true, at least in this state, that lawyers who advertise a specific service charge less for that service than lawyers who do not advertise. It is also true that each time restrictions on the advertising of legal services have been eliminated, the number of lawyers advertising their services has increased and legal costs to consumers have declined in consequence. However, eliminating the state requirement that legal advertisements must specify fees for specific services would almost certainly increase rather than further reduce consumer's legal costs. Lawyers would no longer have an incentive to lower their fees when they begin advertising and if no longer required to specify fee arrangements, many lawyers who now advertise would increase their fees.
In the consumer advocate's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
(A) The first is a generalization that the consumer advocate accepts as true; the second is presented as a consequence that follows from the truth of that generalization.
(B) The first is a pattern of cause and effect that the consumer advocate argues will be repeated in the case at issue; the second acknowledges a circumstance in which that pattern would not hold.
(C) The first is pattern of cause and effect that the consumer advocate predicts will not hold in the case at issue; the second offers a consideration in support of that prediction.
(D) The first is evidence that the consumer advocate offers in support of a certain prediction; the second is that prediction.
(E) The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the main position that the consumer advocate defends; the second is that position.
Looking for an expert to explain this one!
TIA,
GK
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
Most difficult Bold faced CR
This topic has expert replies
-
gunjan1208
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 416
- Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2011 12:48 am
- Thanked: 28 times
- Followed by:6 members
-
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
Conclusion: Eliminating the requirement that legal advertisements must specify fees for specific services would INCREASE legal costs.GmatKiss wrote:"Consumer advocate: it is generally true, at least in this state, that lawyers who advertise a specific service charge less for that service than lawyers who do not advertise. It is also true that each time restrictions on the advertising of legal services have been eliminated, the number of lawyers advertising their services has increased and legal costs to consumers have declined in consequence. However, eliminating the state requirement that legal advertisements must specify fees for specific services would almost certainly increase rather than further reduce consumer's legal costs. Lawyers would no longer have an incentive to lower their fees when they begin advertising and if no longer required to specify fee arrangements, many lawyers who now advertise would increase their fees.
In the consumer advocate's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
Looking for an expert to explain this one!
TIA,
GK
Boldface 1: A causal relationship -- that fewer restrictions typically lead to LOWER legal costs -- that WEAKENS the conclusion.
Boldface 2: A PREMISE that explains why legal costs in the case at hand would INCREASE: lawyers would no longer have an incentive to lower their fees when they begin advertising.
(A) The first is a generalization that the consumer advocate accepts as true; the second is presented as a consequence that follows from the truth of that generalization. The second phrase does not follow from but COUNTERS the first phrase. Eliminate A.
(B) The first is a pattern of cause and effect that the consumer advocate argues will be repeated in the case at issue; the second acknowledges a circumstance in which that pattern would not hold. The first phrase WEAKENS the conclusion. Eliminate B.
(C) The first is pattern of cause and effect that the consumer advocate predicts will not hold in the case at issue; the second offers a consideration in support of that prediction. Correct. The first phrase expresses a causal relationship -- that fewer restrictions typically lead to lower legal costs -- that the passage predicts will not hold true in the case at hand. The second phrase supports the prediction that legal costs will INCREASE.
(D) The first is evidence that the consumer advocate offers in support of a certain prediction; the second is that prediction. The first phrase does not support the prediction that legal costs will INCREASE. Eliminate D.
(E) The first acknowledges a consideration that weighs against the main position that the consumer advocate defends; the second is that position. The second phrase is not the conclusion but a PREMISE. Eliminate E.
The correct answer is C.
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
-
David@VeritasPrep
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2193
- Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 6:30 pm
- Location: Vermont and Boston, MA
- Thanked: 1186 times
- Followed by:512 members
- GMAT Score:770
Had a pretty good discussion of this question a little while back at this link https://www.beatthegmat.com/bold-faced-q ... 65499.html
Hope it helps!
Hope it helps!
