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

Redeem

Explanation Request

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 95
Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2013 8:53 am
Location: United States
Thanked: 2 times
Followed by:5 members

Explanation Request

by tanvis1120 » Tue Aug 12, 2014 6:16 pm
Hi Experts,
Could you please help me tear apart the argument in terms of background, evidence and conclusion?
Sentence 1: "The Eurasian ruffe...lake's natural ecosystem" : Is it the background or the evidence? It is a fact, though.
Sentence 2: "To help track the ruffe....cards about ruffe". Is it another evidence?
Sentence 3: "The cards contain pictures of the ruffe....any ruffe they catch". It is concluded by the agency that its plan will succeed in this way.

Thanks in Advance!
Attachments
unnamed.jpg
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 147
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2014 3:52 pm
Thanked: 53 times
Followed by:21 members

by David@GMATPrepNow » Wed Aug 13, 2014 6:20 am
Hi tanvis1120,

The argument in this passage is related to a plan, specifically that the government's plan to produce information cards will result in angler's reporting any ruffe they catch (so the government can track the ruffe's spread).

The assumption is what must be true for the government's plan to work: that anglers will contact the government when they catch a ruffe (i.e. if anglers DO NOT do this, the government won't be able to track the ruffe's spread). Let's look at our answers:

A. The ruffe has spiny fins that make it unattractive as prey.

This is irrelevant to the assumption. Eliminate A.

B. Ruffe generally feed at night, but most recreational fishing on the Great Lakes is done during daytime hours.

This actually weakens the assumption because it suggests that the ruffe would not be caught. Eliminate B.

C. Most people who fish recreationally on the Great Lakes are interested in the preservation of the lake whitefish because it is a highly prized game fish.

This answer strengthens the assumption that anglers will contact the government when they catch a ruffe, because it is in the best interest of anglers to do whatever will help preserve whitefish which are threatened by the ruffe.

D. The ruffe is one of several nonnative species in the Great Lakes whose existence threatens the survival of lake whitefish populations there.

This answer simply restates the premise in the main question stem. Eliminate D.

E. The bait that most people use when fishing for whitefish on the Great Lakes is not attractive to ruffe. Eliminate E.

The correct answer is C.
Top
User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 2:39 am
Location: Bangalore

by AnuragRatna » Mon Aug 18, 2014 9:11 pm
Most of the argument in CR consist of two kind of clauses:
1- Facts/Premise
2- Conclusion

Assumption is an unstated link between the fact and conclusion.

but in the given question, All three sentences are fact or premise.
The structure of CR is:
1st sentence: The Eurasian ruffe.. ecosystem (This sentence has its own fact & conclusion )
Type: Fact
2nd sentence: To help... the ruffle(describe Agencies' action)
Type: Fact
3rd sentence: The cards... they catch(describe Agencies' action)
Type: Fact

The conclusion is actually given in the question. The conclusion is agencies' action have intended effect.
you have to assume the conclusion true and then mark your answer.
so basically question is about strengthen the argument type.

I solved this question by POE(Process of elimination) method and got the answer as C.
Miles to go before i sleep!!!
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1