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

Redeem

GMAT Discrimination

Expert replies
by rohit9359 » Sun Mar 08, 2009 10:11 am
Q. Some people have questioned the judge’s objectivity in cases of GMAT discrimination against women. But the record shows that in sixty percent of such cases, the judge has decided in favor of the women. This record demonstrates that the judge has not discriminated against women in cases of GMAT discrimination against women.
The argument above is flawed in that it ignores the possibility that
(A) a large number of the judge’s cases arose out of allegations of GMAT discrimination against women
(B) many judges find it difficult to be objective in cases of GMAT discrimination against women
(C) the judge is biased against women defendants or plaintiffs in cases that do not involve GMAT discrimination
(D) the majority of the cases of GMAT discrimination against women that have reached the judge’s court have been appealed from a lower court
(E) the evidence shows that the women should have won in more than sixty percent of the judge’s cases involving GMAT discrimination against women

OA is [spoiler](E)[/spoiler]. Why not [spoiler](C)[/spoiler]? Could someone explain please?

Thanks,
Rohit.
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by dendude » Sun Mar 08, 2009 6:17 pm
I have a serious doubt that the OA is B and not C

C talks about the judge himself being biased against women (eventhough it is in cases that do not deal with GMAT discrimination) and hence shows he practices GMAT discrimination and calls his objective into question

The argument's scope is clearly only about the judge in question.
B could not be correct because it talks about most judges in general, which is out of scope
Join the discussion

by scoobydooby » Mon Mar 09, 2009 3:54 am
(C) the judge is biased against women defendants or plaintiffs in cases that do not involve GMAT discrimination - out of scope

note the stimulus only talks of cases of GMAT discrimination, cases not involving GMAT discrimination are out of scope.
Last edited by scoobydooby on Mon Mar 09, 2009 6:19 am, edited 2 times in total.
Join the discussion

by abhijeetsinghai » Mon Mar 09, 2009 6:17 am
IMO : E

Argument says women have won 60 %, to weaken this , we need to show that women should have won more than 60 % but due to biased judges women didn't get their share of justice....Only E does that job.
Join the discussion

by bmlaud » Mon Mar 09, 2009 9:37 am
Should be E
"Great works are performed not by strength but by perseverance."
Join the discussion

by mason77 » Sat May 14, 2016 1:18 am
E makes sense
Join the discussion