1000 CRs - Comedians - The Beat The GMAT Forum - Expert GMAT Help & MBA Admissions Advice

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

Redeem

1000 CRs - Comedians

This topic has expert replies

Post new topic Post Reply

Previous Topic Next Topic

kajcha: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 321; Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2007 5:42 am; Thanked: 1 times

1000 CRs - Comedians

by kajcha » Fri Sep 14, 2007 9:45 am

All of the best comedians have had unhappy childhoods. Yet, many people who have had happy childhoods are good comedians, and some good comedians who have had miserably unhappy childhoods are happy adults.
If the statements in the passage are true, which one of the following CANNOT be true?
(A) The proportion of good comedians who had unhappy childhoods is greater than the proportion of the best comedians who did.
(B) Some good comedians have had unhappy childhoods and are unhappy adults.
(C) Most of the best comedians are happy adults.
(D) More good comedians have had unhappy childhoods than have had happy childhoods.
(E) The proportion of comedians who are happy adults is higher than the proportion who are unhappy adults.

Quote

Source: Beat The GMAT — Critical Reasoning | Fri Sep 14, 2007 9:45 am

mschling52: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 105; Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 12:34 pm; Location: OH; Thanked: 7 times; GMAT Score:780

by mschling52 » Fri Sep 14, 2007 11:11 am

I think it's A.

The passage states that ALL of the best comedians had unhappy childhoods and that SOME good comedians had happy childhoods.

Since the proportion of the best comedians who had unhappy childhoods is 100%, it is not possible for the proportion of good comedians with unhappy childhoods to be any higher.

Quote

kajcha: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 321; Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2007 5:42 am; Thanked: 1 times

by kajcha » Fri Sep 14, 2007 11:30 am

Yeah, that's the one OA is A

Quote

sibbineni: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 222; Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 8:10 pm; Thanked: 15 times

by sibbineni » Sun Jan 27, 2008 10:22 am

IMO (A)

premise 1: All of the best comedians have had unhappy childhoods.
100% of the best comedians have unhappy childhoods.
Premise 2: Some of the good comedians have had miserably unhappy childhoods
Not 100% of the good comedians have unhappy childhoods

so the proportion of best comedians who had unhappy child hoods is > than good comedians

Quote

simplyjat: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 423; Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 1:29 am; Location: Hyderabad, India; Thanked: 36 times; Followed by:2 members; GMAT Score:770

by simplyjat » Sun Jan 27, 2008 10:54 pm

Are these type questions asked in GMAT? I am having a belief that these questions are out of scope for GMAT...

simplyjat

Quote

Stuart@KaplanGMAT: GMAT Instructor; Posts: 3225; Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 2:40 pm; Location: Toronto; Thanked: 1710 times; Followed by:614 members; GMAT Score:800

by Stuart@KaplanGMAT » Mon Jan 28, 2008 12:52 am

sibbineni wrote:IMO (A)

premise 1: All of the best comedians have had unhappy childhoods.
100% of the best comedians have unhappy childhoods.
Premise 2: Some of the good comedians have had miserably unhappy childhoods
Not 100% of the good comedians have unhappy childhoods

so the proportion of best comedians who had unhappy child hoods is > than good comedians

(A) is correct, but one small mistake in this reasoning.

"Some" literally means "at least one" and has no upper limit.

So, "some of the good comedians have had miserably unhappy childhoods" means that "at least one good comedian has had a miserably unhappy childhood". It's actually possible that ALL of them were miserably unhappy.

So, as Mschling pointed out, since 100% of the best were unhappy, it's impossible that a GREATER proportion of the good were unhappy, since there's no proportion greater than 100%.