Manhattan Gmat 700-800 Level

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 866
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 6:46 pm
Location: Gwalior, India
Thanked: 31 times

Manhattan Gmat 700-800 Level

by goyalsau » Wed Sep 29, 2010 3:41 am
Letter writer: Illegal drug use is often associated with other violent crimes. Statistics indicate that each time police increase their enforcement of anti-drug laws in the city, the number of violent crimes committed in the city declines as a result. However, eliminating criminal penalties for drug use would almost certainly decrease rather than increase the incidence of violent crime. If drugs were no longer illegal, the price would drop precipitously, and drug users would be less likely to use illegal means to acquire the money necessary to support their drug habits.

In the letter writer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?


The first is support offered by the letter writer for a certain forecast; the second is that forecast.

The first acknowledges an observation that refutes the main position that the letter writer takes; the second is that position.

The first is a direct relationship between two activities that the letter writer predicts will hold in the case at hand; the second offers information that, if true, would support that prediction.

The first is a direct relationship between two activities that the letter writer predicts will not hold in the case at hand; the second offers information that, if true, would support that prediction.

The first is a statement that the letter writer believes is true; the second is presented as a logical inference drawn from the truth of that statement.
Saurabh Goyal
[email protected]
-------------------------


EveryBody Wants to Win But Nobody wants to prepare for Win.
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 104
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2010 3:32 am
Location: Mumbai
Thanked: 7 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:680

by hitmis » Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:07 am
imo d

I thought about B for a while, but "the second is that position. " is not right, as the second is just information, the main position is "eliminating criminal penalties for drug use would almost certainly decrease rather than increase the incidence of violent crime."

Legendary Member
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
Thanked: 173 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

by gmatmachoman » Wed Sep 29, 2010 4:14 am
hitmis wrote:imo d

I thought about B for a while, but "the second is that position. " is not right, as the second is just information, the main position is "eliminating criminal penalties for drug use would almost certainly decrease rather than increase the incidence of violent crime."
One more for D. Usage of key words " would " in the second BF hints its a "prediction". So that makes me to pick D

Legendary Member
Posts: 1119
Joined: Fri May 07, 2010 8:50 am
Thanked: 29 times
Followed by:3 members

by diebeatsthegmat » Wed Sep 29, 2010 8:12 am
goyalsau wrote:Letter writer: Illegal drug use is often associated with other violent crimes. Statistics indicate that each time police increase their enforcement of anti-drug laws in the city, the number of violent crimes committed in the city declines as a result. However, eliminating criminal penalties for drug use would almost certainly decrease rather than increase the incidence of violent crime. If drugs were no longer illegal, the price would drop precipitously, and drug users would be less likely to use illegal means to acquire the money necessary to support their drug habits.

In the letter writer's argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?


The first is support offered by the letter writer for a certain forecast; the second is that forecast.

The first acknowledges an observation that refutes the main position that the letter writer takes; the second is that position.

The first is a direct relationship between two activities that the letter writer predicts will hold in the case at hand; the second offers information that, if true, would support that prediction.

The first is a direct relationship between two activities that the letter writer predicts will not hold in the case at hand; the second offers information that, if true, would support that prediction.

The first is a statement that the letter writer believes is true; the second is presented as a logical inference drawn from the truth of that statement.
only D here