BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Spinal injury CR

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1309
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 11:41 pm
Thanked: 33 times
Followed by:5 members

by pradeepkaushal9518 » Mon Jul 26, 2010 7:41 am
i cant she the problem can u please post in word format
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:00 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:3 members

by ssgmatter » Mon Jul 26, 2010 7:45 am
dude it is in word doc only...i am able to open here...please try and let me know
Best-
Amit
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 544
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 9:14 am
Location: Pune, India
Thanked: 31 times
Followed by:2 members

by adi_800 » Mon Jul 26, 2010 9:43 am
I think the answer is A...
This is defender assumption in which you eliminate that point if raised would go against the argument.

The conclusion of the argument is S handled rakes are better than new rakes for lowering risk of spinal injury. But what if there are other forms that cause injuries as a result of raking. If there are, then the conclusion would be weakened...

Hence A has to be the assumption..
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 748
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:54 am
Thanked: 46 times
Followed by:3 members

by outreach » Mon Jul 26, 2010 9:57 am
u have posted the document in "docx" format...probably pradeepkaushal9518 wanted the doc to be posted in '.doc' format
ssgmatter wrote:dude it is in word doc only...i am able to open here...please try and let me know
-------------------------------------
--------------------------------------
General blog
https://amarnaik.wordpress.com
MBA blog
https://amarrnaik.blocked/
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 748
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:54 am
Thanked: 46 times
Followed by:3 members

by outreach » Mon Jul 26, 2010 10:22 am
Conclusion:
straight rakes (old) are better than s-shaped rakes (new) for minimizing risk of spinal injury.


Compression injury is implied as the cause of damage of spine. there could be other causes that cause spinal injury Unless other reasons are eliminated we cannot derive the conclusion
A is doing this job by stating that the compression injury is the only cause.
-------------------------------------
--------------------------------------
General blog
https://amarnaik.wordpress.com
MBA blog
https://amarrnaik.blocked/
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1