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

Redeem

Lightning

Expert replies
by GmatKiss » Sun May 20, 2012 9:09 pm
Frieda: Lightning causes fires and damages electronic equipment. Since lightning rods can prevent any major damage, every building should have one.

Erik: Your recommendation is pointless. It is true that lightning occasionally causes fires, but faulty wiring and overloaded circuits cause far more fires and damage to equipment than lightning does.

Erik's response fails to establish that Frieda's recommendation should not be acted on because his response

(A) does not show that the benefits that would follow from Frieda's recommendation would be offset by any disadvantage
(B) does not offer any additional way of lessening the risk associated with lightning
(C) appeals to Frieda's emotions rather than to her reason
(D) introduces an irrelevant comparison between overloaded circuits and faulty wiring
(E) confuses the notion of preventing damage with that of causing inconvenience
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by bubbliiiiiiii » Mon May 21, 2012 4:12 am
C
Regards,

Pranay
Join the discussion

by jimmyjimmy » Mon May 21, 2012 12:31 pm
B- coz freda speaks abt lightning and he fails to tell abt that
Join the discussion

by jimmyjimmy » Tue May 22, 2012 7:52 am
OA??
Join the discussion

by dhonu121 » Tue May 22, 2012 8:52 am
A is the only choice that seems right.
Rest all are fluff.
If you've liked my post, let me know by pressing the thanks button.
Join the discussion

by justharsha » Tue May 22, 2012 10:27 am
I think A is the answer. Can you please confirm?
Join the discussion

by Gaurav 2013-fall » Fri May 25, 2012 1:54 am
got to A and B . Finally IMO A
Join the discussion

by agarwalva » Fri May 25, 2012 9:55 am
GmatKiss wrote:Frieda: Lightning causes fires and damages electronic equipment. Since lightning rods can prevent any major damage, every building should have one.

Erik: Your recommendation is pointless. It is true that lightning occasionally causes fires, but faulty wiring and overloaded circuits cause far more fires and damage to equipment than lightning does.

Erik's response fails to establish that Frieda's recommendation should not be acted on because his response

(A) does not show that the benefits that would follow from Frieda's recommendation would be offset by any disadvantage
(B) does not offer any additional way of lessening the risk associated with lightning
(C) appeals to Frieda's emotions rather than to her reason
(D) introduces an irrelevant comparison between overloaded circuits and faulty wiring
(E) confuses the notion of preventing damage with that of causing inconvenience


IMO A

Frieda:: Suggests a way to prevent lightning fires
Erik: Concludes recommendation is pointless... and gives a reason of other causes of fires

Q/s stem -->Erik's response fails to establish that Frieda's recommendation should not be acted on because his response --> what is the flaw in Eric's conclusion ..



(A) does not show that the benefits that would follow from Frieda's recommendation would be offset by any disadvantage
Absolutely correct.. Eric is not able to point out what i the disadvantage with the method suggested by Frieda

(B) does not offer any additional way of lessening the risk associated with lightning
..Even if eric gives other additional choices.. it has to prove why they are better...and why Frieda's method is pointless
Join the discussion

by heymayank08 » Fri May 25, 2012 11:22 pm
A for me what is the OA
Join the discussion