the guarantee comes from the fact that the problems have to pass the "experimental" stage with the right kind of statistics. if a CR problem indeed relied on something that was random, or not "composed in the right way", then it would fail the experimental stage and be tossed from the exam.pemdas wrote:Then if human thought process cannot be broken down with scientific pieces and structured in the logical way where is the guarantee that GMAT CR was composed in the right way?
this is not an objection to my point; in fact, it's an illustration of my point. both the english and the latin americans would make such a judgment intuitively; they would not consciously progress down a list of explicit rules governing how to judge a walking gait.It's not likely that GMAT makers bring such a subjectivity to their exam. I still believe that there is no reason to lead GMAT aspirants to superstitious beliefs about the logical reasoning part of exam. By the way your example of human walking might be interpreted differently by different populations - chin-and-chest up Englishman's walking might be expressed as vigorous foot-staging by Latin Americans who are more relaxed physically.
also, what about the example of OG12 #109 (among countless others) above?
it's a concrete fact that this problem requires the common-sense extension of "if people are likely to be caught doing something, they'll be less likely to do it". all of the logical structures in the world aren't going to give you that point; you have to use real-world common sense.
... except this isn't true.@Ron, I see you have aced the style of GMAT through many years of productive tutoring career and now switched to automatism in thinking over CR entries. The latter is not the same as intuition which will inevitably lead the inexperienced test taker to choose a wrong answer.
this is the last post on which i will argue about this, because it's a fact: the CR section is designed to work solely on the power of normal human reasoning. there's no special academic training and no special "gmat logic" required; indeed, this is the whole point.
