XLogic wrote:Mark: When my mother goes to Jones organic store, she often buys fresh yellow tomatoes. In fact, she says Jones organic store is one of the main factors she considers when shopping for fresh yellow tomatoes. Since Shelly bought fresh yellow tomatoes yesterday, she must have gone to Jones organic store.

The reasoning in Mark's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument

(A) Fails to show that buying yellow tomatoes is the cause of an effect rather than the effect of a cause

(B) Mistakes a condition sufficient for buying fresh yellow tomatoes for a condition necessary for buying fresh yellow tomatoes

(C) Mistakes a main factor considered in selecting X for a condition required for selecting X

(D) Bases its conclusion on a premise that is reasonably not credible

(E) Incorrectly assumes that a single cause cannot lead to multiple effects

This one is actually not too much of a typical GMAT question but an interesting one none-the-less.

My pick would be C. Below is the reasoning.

A. Don't see a cause and effect relationship anywhere. THe argument follows the logic that since A does this, B would definitely have done this. So it is a chain of actions, arriving at one conclusion.

B. The argument says that when Mark's mother needs to buy fresh yellow tomatoes she will go to Jones organic store. Since shelly bought fresh yellow tomatoes yesterday, she must have gone to Jones organic store. But wait a second. We are assuming that Jones is the only store that sells fresh yellow tomatoes. Nowhere in the argument does it say that this is the case. Now lets look at option B. If Jones was the only store selling such tomatoes, it would be necessary to go to Jones, but we know that to buy fresh yellow tomatoes we "Can" go to Jones. Hence Jones is sufficient to attend to my request. But nowhere does it say that Jones is the only seller, or necessary in other words. Option B could be plausible.

C. Tough call. This means the same as B . More or Less. So lets hold on to this one for now.

D. Out of scope. Credibility is not in question here.

E. No multiple effects. No bearing on argument whatsoever.

Now we are left between B & C. So we have to rule one out.

C uses the same terminology and logic as the argument does. The passage says "Jones is one of the main factors when selecting X (fresh yellow tomatoes). and it also follows the same logic as B. Im not able to clearly differentiate between the two but C seems better.

My pick "C"

BTW. Wats the OA?

@chufus, great analysis. Question: are these two sentences equivalent?

X being selected is one of the main factors considered when selecting B
X will be selected only when B is selected

If not, why not?

IMO C

C from my side. What's the OA?

Thanks.

Why is B wrong? OA next.

XLogic wrote:@chufus, great analysis. Question: are these two sentences equivalent?

X being selected is one of the main factors considered when selecting B
X will be selected only when B is selected

If not, why not?

I think there is a small "key" that lies in the passage : "she says Jones organic store is one of the main factors she considers when shopping for fresh yellow tomatoes." Conditions generally mean that they "NEED" to be satisfied. Where as factors can be disregarded and the objective will still be achieved. Which is exactly what the intention of the question is. The later half of the answers is the same. Required means necessary. Its the first half of both answers that is different. So i figure they are not equivalent.

OA C