GMAT Discrimination

This topic has expert replies
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 66
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 2:05 pm

GMAT Discrimination

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.
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 160
Joined: Fri May 30, 2008 7:10 pm
Thanked: 10 times
GMAT Score:600

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

Legendary Member
Posts: 1035
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 10:56 pm
Thanked: 104 times
Followed by:1 members

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.

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 8:54 am
Location: US
Thanked: 1 times
GMAT Score:700

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.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 174
Joined: Thu Jan 08, 2009 12:04 am
Thanked: 5 times
GMAT Score:620

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

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 100
Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2014 11:28 am

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