780+ CR's
-
crackgmat007
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 882
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 2:57 pm
- Thanked: 15 times
- Followed by:1 members
- GMAT Score:690
IMO - A.
Eriks conclusion is that the recommendation that Fredida gave is pointless. IMO - if something is pointless, it may mean that the demerits outwiegh the merits.
Eriks conclusion is that the recommendation that Fredida gave is pointless. IMO - if something is pointless, it may mean that the demerits outwiegh the merits.
-
gmat740
- MBA Student
- Posts: 1194
- Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 9:42 pm
- Location: Paris, France
- Thanked: 71 times
- Followed by:17 members
- GMAT Score:710
Answer is A
OE : Erik's response simply sidesteps Frieda's reasoning, accepting the fact that lightning causes fires, but saying that other things cause a lot of fires, too. That's hardly a reason for not doing something about the lightning damage. Erik's problem is that he gives absolutely no reason for not following
Now why B is wrong :
It's true that Erik fails to offer any additional way of combatting lightning damage, but that's not the point. Even if he did have other ideas, that wouldn't indicate that Frieda's recommendation also shouldn't be acted on.
Hope you guys liked the questions out here.
OE : Erik's response simply sidesteps Frieda's reasoning, accepting the fact that lightning causes fires, but saying that other things cause a lot of fires, too. That's hardly a reason for not doing something about the lightning damage. Erik's problem is that he gives absolutely no reason for not following
Now why B is wrong :
It's true that Erik fails to offer any additional way of combatting lightning damage, but that's not the point. Even if he did have other ideas, that wouldn't indicate that Frieda's recommendation also shouldn't be acted on.
Hope you guys liked the questions out here.
-
crackgmat007
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 882
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 2:57 pm
- Thanked: 15 times
- Followed by:1 members
- GMAT Score:690
-
italian7745
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 113
- Joined: Sun May 24, 2009 8:01 am
- Thanked: 4 times
I will go for A as the conclusion states that " the real cause must lie somewhere else" . The argument mentions that "high household debt levels could have been the cause for recession" which shows that the argument is trying to figure out the main cause of recession.
-
madhur_ahuja
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 435
- Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 3:55 am
- Thanked: 17 times
-
gmat740
- MBA Student
- Posts: 1194
- Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 9:42 pm
- Location: Paris, France
- Thanked: 71 times
- Followed by:17 members
- GMAT Score:710
any more thoughts??
Just a hint for those opting for D. D isn't the correct answer
although when I did this question,I landed up with D,which is the wrong one indeed
Just a hint for those opting for D. D isn't the correct answer
although when I did this question,I landed up with D,which is the wrong one indeed
-
ashaydesai
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 31
- Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 5:32 am
- Thanked: 1 times
-
viju9162
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 434
- Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 9:48 pm
- Location: Bangalore
- Thanked: 6 times
- GMAT Score:600
Karan,
Do you have explaination for this?
italian7745 has given a good resoning to arrive at the conclusion.
Do you have explaination for this?
italian7745 has given a good resoning to arrive at the conclusion.
"Native of" is used for a individual while "Native to" is used for a large group
I personalized the argument:gmat740 wrote:Please state the reason why D is wrong and why A is correct.shilpi84 wrote:IMO:A
some theorists:household debtness led to recession.
How?(There is a reason that most assets were owned by low-income household,and most of the debt was owned by low-income households....)
now a counter fact is introduced which says that quite affluent people must have owned most of the household debt,since money is not lent to those without assets.
Conclusion of the argument based on the counter premise is that therefore,the real cause must lie elsewhere.
This implies A
