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

Redeem

Professor Harper’s ideas...!!!

Expert replies
by killer1387 » Sun Mar 04, 2012 11:33 pm
Q.
Jane: Professor Harper's ideas for modifying the design of guitars are of no value because there is no general agreement among musicians as to what a guitar should sound like and, consequently, no widely accepted basis for evaluating the merits of a guitar's sound.

Mark: What's more, Harper's ideas have had enough time to be adopted if they really resulted in superior sound. It took only ten years for the Torres design for guitars to be almost universally adopted because of the improvement it makes in tonal quality.

Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship between Jane's argument and Mark's argument?

A. Mark's argument shows how a weakness in Jane's argument can be overcome.
B. Mark's argument has a premise in common with Jane's argument.
C. Mark and Jane use similar techniques to argue for different conclusions.
D. Mark's argument restates Jane's argument in other terms.
E. Mark's argument and Jane's argument are based on conflicting suppositions.

I could not reach a consensus for this question. guys try out OA after some discussions, got stuck between D and E
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by agarwalmanoj2000 » Mon Mar 05, 2012 1:20 am
I think the answer is E.

A. Mark's argument shows how a weakness in Jane's argument can be overcome.
Mark support Jane. Notice the word Mark' s words What's more

B. Mark’s argument has a premise in common with Jane's argument.
Mark and Jane have no common premise.

C. Mark and Jane use similar techniques to argue for different conclusions.
Mark and Jane conclusion is same i.e. Professor Harper’s ideas are of no value.

D. Mark’s argument restates Jane’s argument in other terms.
Argument comprise of premises and conclusion. Mark restates Jane conclusion but does not restates any of the Jane's premises.

E. Mark’s argument and Jane’s argument are based on conflicting suppositions.
This is the answer.
Mark says merits of Guitar sound cannot be evaluated, but John says that Torres design improved tonal/sound quality. This is conflicting. If we cannot evaluate sound then we cannot conclude sound quality improved.
Join the discussion

by goelmaya » Mon Mar 05, 2012 10:39 am
IMO E.

conclusion is same(No value). Suppositions are different (sound of a guitar)
Join the discussion

by killer1387 » Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:03 pm
OA-E
Last edited by killer1387 on Mon Mar 05, 2012 8:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Join the discussion

by GmatKiss » Mon Mar 05, 2012 7:12 pm
IMO: E
Join the discussion

by mankey » Mon Mar 05, 2012 10:02 pm
What is the problem with D?

The conclusion is same for both.

Look forward to your response.

Regards.
Join the discussion

by sam2304 » Tue Mar 06, 2012 4:33 am
mankey wrote:What is the problem with D?

The conclusion is same for both.

Look forward to your response.

Regards.
Conclusion is the same but the option speaks about the argument, which includes both premises and conclusion.

IMO E.
Getting defeated is just a temporary notion, giving it up is what makes it permanent.
https://gmatandbeyond.blogspot.in/
Join the discussion