Critical and tactical reasoning

Expert replies

BTGmoderatorRO: Moderator; Posts: 772; Joined: Wed Aug 30, 2017 6:29 pmFollowed by: 6 members

by BTGmoderatorRO » Sun Oct 15, 2017 10:25 am

Researchers believe that we will ultimately be able to explain all “psychic” phenomena. Achieving this goal requires knowledge of how mental images are “sent” and “received” over distance and how senders and receivers interact at a biological level. At present, there is a substantial amount of fundamental knowledge about receiving images and sending images. Thus, as researchers claim, psychic phenomena will soon be explainable.

Which one of the following indicates an error in the reasons in the passage?
(A) The conclusion contradicts researchers.
(B) The passage fails to describe what is currently known about senders and receivers.
(C) The passage does not indicate that any knowledge has been achieved about how senders and receivers interact at a biological level.
(D) The argument does not indicate whether this information will be useful.
(E) The passage is not specific about what psychic phenomena are being researched.
oa c.

please, which approach can i use to get the correct answer?

Source: Beat The GMAT — Critical Reasoning | Sun Oct 15, 2017 10:25 am

EconomistGMATTutor: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 555; Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2017 4:18 pmFollowed by: 12 members; Thanked: 180 times

by EconomistGMATTutor » Wed Oct 18, 2017 9:10 am

The conclusion is "Thus, as researchers claim, psychic phenomena will soon be explainable." The first sentence is nearly identical to this -- it tells us that yes, this is what they believe. The last sentence concludes "they're right."

The evidence is that psychic phenomena will be explainable after two conditions are met: 1) knowledge of how mental images are “sent” and “received” over distance and 2) knowledge of how senders and receivers interact at a biological level. The passage then says that condition 1 has been met.

But what about condition 2? Was this condition met? Simply assuming that it was is a flaw. Choice C points this out.

Your approach of this question should be the same as for nearly every type of CR question. Identify the conclusion and the evidence, and then consider what assumptions are made. When looking for an existing flaw, look for unwarranted assumptions. There are other types of flaws, but unwarranted assumptions is a biggie.

I'm available for further help with this question.

GMAT Prep From The Economist
We offer 70+ point score improvement money back guarantee.
Our average student improves 98 points.

Featured schoolRound 2 closes Jan 7, 2027 63 days left

Chicago Booth

Since 1982, 10 Booth faculty members have received the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences, more than any other business school.

#3
U.S. News rank: $175,000
Median base salary: 670
Average GMAT Focus: 635
Students in the class

Apply to Booth Visit chicagobooth.edu See the full profile

Photo: Warren LeMay, CC BY-SA 2.0

GMAT Course Reviews

563 reviews

1168 reviews

431 reviews

359 reviews

147 reviews

5/5

5 Star (563 Reviews)

"Target Test Prep is the closest to the official version of the GMAT exam, about 99% accuracy in terms of the quality and quantity of information. The course has excellently created singular sets of focused lessons and tests for every possible topic that one could come across in the official GMAT exam."

"The TTP course maximizes the efficiency of the time you spend studying. It will take time and effort but I could almost guarantee that if you complete the course exactly as it is laid out you will get an amazing score. They also have a very responsive team willing to help with any questions you might have."

"TTP has two things that I think no other test prep company offers: A teaching approach that reinforces understanding and an attitude that will give you the mental preparedness needed to succeed on the test. TTP gives you a deep understanding of the concept you need to know while teaching you how to think."

Write a Review