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

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

A NICE LSAT test q

Expert replies
by prachich1987 » Tue Feb 08, 2011 8:09 am
Some statisticians claim that the surest way to increase the overall correctness of the total set of one's beliefs is: never change that set, except by rejecting a belief when given adequate evidence against it. However, if this were the only rule one followed, then whenever one were presented with any kind of evidence, one would have to either reject some of one's beliefs or else leave one's beliefs unchanged. But then, over time, one could only have fewer and fewer beliefs. Since we need many beliefs in order to survive, the statisticians' claim must be mistaken.

The argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it
(A) presumes, without providing any justification, that the surest way of increasing the overall correctness of the total set of one's beliefs must not hinder one's ability to survive
(B) neglects the possibility that even while following the statisticians' rule, one might also accept new beliefs when presented with some kinds of evidence
(C) overlooks the possibility that some large sets of beliefs are more correct overall than are some small sets of beliefs
(D) takes for granted that one should accept some beliefs related to survival even when given adequate evidence against them
(E) takes for granted that the beliefs we need in order to have many beliefs must all be correct beliefs

OA : after some time
Thanks!
Prachi
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by fitzgerald23 » Tue Feb 08, 2011 8:49 am
1. Statisticians say to never change the set of beliefs unless given evidence against it
2. This would cause people to have fewer and fewer beliefs
3. We need many beliefs to survive

I want to eliminate the easy ones first:

C. Incorrect. His argument has nothing to do with correctness, just that we need many beliefs

D. Incorrect. He never says that you should keep beliefs that are wrong, just that we need many beliefs and the statisticians claim doesnt allow that

E. Incorrect. Again he never talks about incorrect vs correct. Just that we need many.

Here is the tricky part and Im going to guess A is the correct answer even though I cant really justify the choice. Here is my problem with B. In B they talk about accepting new beliefs as a possibility. That would seem logical to choose as the answer. New evidence leads to new beliefs meaning the set is still large. My problem with that is if you go back to the passage and the statisticians argument it is not a possibility to accept new beliefs. Their rule is either reject a belief or keep it. Nowhere do they allow for a belief to be modified or a new belief to be added. Based on that I dont think he is neglecting the possibility because, according to the statisticians, that possibility does not even exist. So by POE Id go with A as the answer.
Join the discussion

by rohu27 » Tue Feb 08, 2011 9:41 am
A

I cannot offer a thorough explanation though.
prachich1987 wrote:Some statisticians claim that the surest way to increase the overall correctness of the total set of one's beliefs is: never change that set, except by rejecting a belief when given adequate evidence against it. However, if this were the only rule one followed, then whenever one were presented with any kind of evidence, one would have to either reject some of one's beliefs or else leave one's beliefs unchanged. But then, over time, one could only have fewer and fewer beliefs. Since we need many beliefs in order to survive, the statisticians' claim must be mistaken.

The argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it
(A) presumes, without providing any justification, that the surest way of increasing the overall correctness of the total set of one's beliefs must not hinder one's ability to survive
(B) neglects the possibility that even while following the statisticians' rule, one might also accept new beliefs when presented with some kinds of evidence
(C) overlooks the possibility that some large sets of beliefs are more correct overall than are some small sets of beliefs
(D) takes for granted that one should accept some beliefs related to survival even when given adequate evidence against them
(E) takes for granted that the beliefs we need in order to have many beliefs must all be correct beliefs

OA : after some time
Join the discussion

by Tani » Tue Feb 08, 2011 4:51 pm
I agree that it's A. It seems to me that the author is rejecting the method because it might conflict with survival, but the statisticians aren't addressing survival - only correctness. It's the classic case of a new term in the conclusion that comes out of nowhere.
Tani Wolff
Join the discussion

by prachich1987 » Tue Feb 08, 2011 8:03 pm
The OA is indeed A
Thanks!
Prachi
Join the discussion