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

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Environmentalists confused me.

Expert replies
by saurabhmahajan » Tue Sep 28, 2010 11:11 pm
Some environmentalists question the prudence of exploiting features of the environment, arguing that
there are no economic benefits to be gained from forests, mountains, or wetlands that no longer exist.
Many environmentalists claim that because nature has intrinsic value it would be wrong to destroy such
features of the environment, even if the economic costs of doing so were outweighed by the economic
costs of not doing so.

Which one of the following can be logically inferred from the passage?

(A) It is economically imprudent to exploit features of the environment.

(B) Some environmentalists appeal to a noneconomic justification in questioning the defensibility of exploiting features of the environment.

(C) Most environmentalists appeal to economic reasons in questioning the defensibility of exploiting features of the environment.

(D) Many environmentalists provide only a noneconomic justification in questioning the defensibility of exploiting features of the environment.

(E) Even if there is no economic reason for protecting the environment, there is a sound noneconomic justification for doing so.
Thanks and regards,
Saurabh Mahajan

I can understand you not winning,but i will not forgive you for not trying.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by goyalsau » Tue Sep 28, 2010 11:33 pm
I think it should be B.
Saurabh Goyal
[email protected]
-------------------------


EveryBody Wants to Win But Nobody wants to prepare for Win.
Join the discussion

by ashokkadam » Wed Sep 29, 2010 12:32 am
@Saurabh, This is a inference type question. This is same as asking- Which of the choices must be true? The last part of the stimulus helps us to figure out that choice E is the statement which must be true or can be inferred. Hope that helps.
saurabhmahajan wrote:Some environmentalists question the prudence of exploiting features of the environment, arguing that
there are no economic benefits to be gained from forests, mountains, or wetlands that no longer exist.
Many environmentalists claim that because nature has intrinsic value it would be wrong to destroy such
features of the environment, even if the economic costs of doing so were outweighed by the economic
costs of not doing so.

Which one of the following can be logically inferred from the passage?

(A) It is economically imprudent to exploit features of the environment.

(B) Some environmentalists appeal to a noneconomic justification in questioning the defensibility of exploiting features of the environment.

(C) Most environmentalists appeal to economic reasons in questioning the defensibility of exploiting features of the environment.

(D) Many environmentalists provide only a noneconomic justification in questioning the defensibility of exploiting features of the environment.

(E) Even if there is no economic reason for protecting the environment, there is a sound noneconomic justification for doing so.
Force and mind are opposites; morality ends where a gun begins.
Join the discussion

by saurabhmahajan » Wed Sep 29, 2010 12:39 am
OA : B
Thanks and regards,
Saurabh Mahajan

I can understand you not winning,but i will not forgive you for not trying.
Join the discussion