Critical Reasoning

Please explain , I am confused

Dr. A: The new influenza vaccine is useless at best and possibly dangerous. I would never use it on a patient.
Dr. B: But three studies published in the Journal of Medical Associates have rated that vaccine as unusually effective.
Dr. A: The studies must have been faulty because the vaccine is worthless.
In which of the following is the reasoning most similar to that of Dr. A?
(A) Three of my patients have been harmed by that vaccine during the past three weeks, so the vaccine is unsafe.
(B) Jerrold Jersey recommends this milk, and I don’t trust Jerrold Jersey, so I won’t buy this milk.
(C) Wingzz tennis balls perform best because they are far more effective than any other tennis balls.
(D) I’m buying Vim Vitamins. Doctors recommend them more often than they recommend any other vitamins, so Vim Vitamins must be good.
(E) Since University of Muldoon graduates score about 20 percent higher than average on the GMAT, Sheila Lee, a University of Muldoon graduate, will score about 20 percent higher than average when she takes the GMAT.

Q no 14, 1000CR Test C.

I'm also confused on this, There is a thread on the same question but there is no explanation

https://www.beatthegmat.com/answers-and- ... t1893.html

This is a really rare GMAT question type, so I wouldn't worry about it too much.

The problem with Doctor A's argument is that it's circular - he assumes the truth of his conclusion in order to reach the conclusion.

Doctor A's argument is basically: I know the vaccine is worthless because I know that it's worthless.

Answer (C) follows the same form: why are Wingzz tennis balls the best? Because they're the best!

Stuart, I like your answer.

I have one question: Should we make comparisons between things: in this case, between the vaccine and the Wingzz tennis balls. hence, narrowing our choices.

and between people?


because I found the answer B a good answer. the author has some personal issues about Jerrold Jersey so he doesn't drink the milk. The author has also something against the vaccine, what makes him not use it on a patient.

Dr.A has something against vaccine and his decision is not based on anything whereas the person is not drinking milk because he doesn't trust Jerrold. His decision is based on s'thing i.e. don't trust Jerrold

i think comparison of thing may make you sometime overlook the correct answer; won't suggest it because it seems risky

Can anyone give me an explanation? I am thinking B. thank you for insights.

In powerscore CR book it says that the method and flaw in reasoning are rarely tested unless you are doing well. Is it true? I find these questions really tough.

tendee wrote:In powerscore CR book it says that the method and flaw in reasoning are rarely tested unless you are doing well. Is it true? I find these questions really tough.

Hi,

as I noted in my original post, this question type is extremely rare on the GMAT and I really wouldn't worry about it unless you've mastered pretty much every other question that can appear (in both math and verbal).

For CR, focus on weakening, strengthening, assumption and inference questions - those 4 types make up roughly 90% of the questions seen by most test takers.