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

Redeem

Not Convinced with the OA..need help in analysing CR

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 316
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 6:18 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:6 members

Not Convinced with the OA..need help in analysing CR

by dhonu121 » Tue May 29, 2012 11:57 am
Some animals, such as dolphins, dogs, and African grey parrots, seem to exhibit cognitive functions typically
associated with higher-order primates such as chimpanzees, gorillas, and humans. Some parrots, for example,
have vocabularies of hundreds of words that they can string together in a comprehensible syntax. This clearly
shows that humans and primates are not the only animals capable of using language to communicate. One parrot,
named Alex, has been known to ask to be petted or kissed and will exhibit aggression if the gesture offered is not
the specific one requested. Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the conclusion above?
"¢ Dolphins can be trained to assist divers in ocean rescues.
"¢ Gorillas in captivity often learn hand signals for food and water.
"¢ Dogs are capable of sensing their owners' moods and often exhibit concern if they sense sadness.
"¢ Chimpanzees can memorize long sequences of key punches on machines that dispense food.
"¢ Alex does not exhibit aggression when offered a gesture that he specifically requested.
OA:E
OE:(E) CORRECT. If Alex does not exhibit aggression when offered a gesture that
he specifically requested, it suggests that Alex can tell the difference between the
gestures that he requests and those that he does not. In other words, he is a
non-primate / non-human but he is communicating via language. If he also
exhibited aggression when offered the gestures he requested, it would be more
difficult to claim that he was communicating via language.

What about D ?
Even the dog comes in the category of those discussed and he is able to communicate effeciently when he is expressing concern in the same way the parrot expresses aggresiveness.

I find D better.

Please help me here.
If you've liked my post, let me know by pressing the thanks button.
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 768
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 4:18 pm
Location: Berkeley, CA
Thanked: 387 times
Followed by:140 members

by Mike@Magoosh » Tue May 29, 2012 1:35 pm
Hi there. I'm happy to help with this. :)

So, in a nutshell, the argument is:
We already know higher order primate have advanced cognitive functions.
It appears that dolphins, dogs, and African grey parrots do too --- they can use language.
Look at this smart parrot Alex using language.

What is at stake in this argument is --- are dolphins, dogs, and African grey parrots also capable of the advanced cognitive functions that, previously, we thought were exclusive to the higher primates?

(B) & (D) tells us about advanced skills of higher primate. We already knew that: that was the background assumption of the argument. The argument is about whether dolphins, dogs, and African grey parrots are at the same level, the level where we already know the higher primates are. These choices don't further the argument.

(A) & (C) are not about high cognitive ability. All mammals can feel some sort of empathy. Turtles can be trained to do simple tasks. These are not higher order cognitive skills. ore to the point, neither one involves the command of language, which is the skill under consideration in the prompt.

Only (E) completes the picture of Alex's discrimination --- this assures us: Alex indeed understand what gesture he is verbally requesting. (If he were reacting with anger regardless of the response, it would be hard to claim that he understood language.)

Does all this make sense?

Here's a free lesson video about CR that you may find helpful.
https://gmat.magoosh.com/lessons/581-general-cr-strategy

Let me know if you have any further questions.

Mike :)
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
https://gmat.magoosh.com/
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 316
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 6:18 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:6 members

by dhonu121 » Tue May 29, 2012 8:17 pm
(A) & (C) are not about high cognitive ability. All mammals can feel some sort of empathy. Turtles can be trained to do simple tasks. These are not higher order cognitive skills. ore to the point, neither one involves the command of language, which is the skill under consideration in the prompt.

Only (E) completes the picture of Alex's discrimination --- this assures us: Alex indeed understand what gesture he is verbally requesting. (If he were reacting with anger regardless of the response, it would be hard to claim that he understood language.)

Does all this make sense?
Not really, no.
E just extends the example that was given in the argument about the parrot.
A and C on the other hand also extend that example given in the argument by quoting instances of other non-primates doing the same thing as done by parrot.

How can dolphins assist divers ? or How can Dogs express concern on sensing sadness ?
They must be behaving in a particular way to do that as is done by Alex, the parrot.

Why is the behavior of parrot taking precedence over the behavior of other animals of the same specy is not clear to me.
If you've liked my post, let me know by pressing the thanks button.
Top
User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 57
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 11:54 am
Location: India
Thanked: 8 times
GMAT Score:640

by chetansharma » Wed May 30, 2012 9:02 am
Hi Dhonu,

I guess you wanted to say that C is also a good contender for the answer choice.

If we can go by POE, we can arrive at the answer choice.

A - This option states that the dolphins can be trained, which will not help the conclusion
B- This option discusses about the higher order primates - will not help the conclusion
C- Alone option C will not help the conclusion as in the case of option E. Option E along with the information given in the stimulus only will completely strengthen the conclusion not just option E. If the option C could have completed the analogy similar to option E (along with the info in the stimulus) then it could have strengthened the conclusion.
D- Same as above
E- same the OE- which is more than satisfactory

Regards,
Chetan Sharma
If my post helped you - let me know by pushing the thanks button :wink:
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 316
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 6:18 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:6 members

by dhonu121 » Wed May 30, 2012 9:36 am
Hi Chetan,
I am almost convinced by your point of completing stuff already given in the argument to strengthen the argument. But somewhere deep inside I feel that its because we know that the answer is E.
In strengthen questions, aren't we supposed to bring something outside of the scope of the argument to strengthen it ?
If that is the case then A and C stand full chance of being the correct answer choices.

Dolphins CAN be trained.(Thus they have the ABILITY to communicate. They will obv not talk in English/Hindi. They will make certain gesture as Alex does.)
Dogs EXHIBIT concern.(They also must be making some physical gestures like Alex.)

Hence they also strengthen the conclusion that
shows that humans and primates are not the only animals capable of using language to communicate.
If you've liked my post, let me know by pressing the thanks button.
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 307
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 9:45 pm
Thanked: 12 times
GMAT Score:700

by Gaurav 2013-fall » Wed May 30, 2012 9:37 am
Dhonu,

I will give my 2 cents here. The author defines cognitive functions as 1) aggression (if demands not met) and 2) ability to communicate. Nowhere author talks about sensing mood and exhibiting concern. Please do not assume that sensing mood and exhibiting concern are examples of cognitive functions. Although these may be cognitive functions but our boundaries are what has been stated in the argument.

Hope it helps.
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 316
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 6:18 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:6 members

by dhonu121 » Wed May 30, 2012 10:09 am
Hi Gaurav,
According to the argument, the author says the following,
Some parrots, for example,
have vocabularies of hundreds of words that they can string together in a comprehensible syntax.This clearly
shows that humans and primates are not the only animals capable of using language to communicate.
Thus, the part mentioned after this, expressing aggression does not go well with what is stated as capability to communicate using language. It can be said that the original definition of communication using language is extrapolated to include gestures such as aggression.
If you've liked my post, let me know by pressing the thanks button.
Top

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 768
Joined: Wed Dec 28, 2011 4:18 pm
Location: Berkeley, CA
Thanked: 387 times
Followed by:140 members

by Mike@Magoosh » Wed May 30, 2012 10:29 am
dhonu121 wrote: E just extends the example that was given in the argument about the parrot.
A and C on the other hand also extend that example given in the argument by quoting instances of other non-primates doing the same thing as done by parrot.

How can dolphins assist divers? or How can Dogs express concern on sensing sadness? They must be behaving in a particular way to do that as is done by Alex, the parrot. Why is the behavior of parrot taking precedence over the behavior of other animals of the same specy is not clear to me.
The argument is about "cognitive functions typically associated with higher-order primates." Those would include higher use of language and the capacity for abstract reasoning.

(C) Dogs are capable of sensing their owners' moods and often exhibit concern if they sense sadness.

It's true, this extends the argument to dogs. The problem is: empathy (the skill the dogs demonstrate) is not a higher-order cognitive function. Empathy is essentially affective rather than cognitive. It's simply a different part of the brain. It has nothing to do with language or abstraction. The dog doesn't need to talk or understand words in order to feel genuine empathy. It doesn't need to abstract: empathy is very concrete and directed to the sad person right there. That's why it's irrelevant to the argument.

(A) Dolphins can be trained to assist divers in ocean rescues.

It's true, this extends the argument to dolphins. It's true that, in general, dolphins are extremely clever, and may be capable of more than most higher-order primates. This factoid, though, does not really show where dolphins shine. The ability to be trained to perform specific actions --- that's more than some animals can do, but again, it's not higher-order cognitive abilities. Again, it has nothing to do with language acquisition or with abstraction. Training to help divers in specific procedures is very concrete; again, the dolphin doesn't need to abstract, and doesn't need to talk or understand words in order to be trained very effectively. Therefore, this is also irrelevant to the argument.

The argument is not in general about animals doing somewhat-impressive generally-intelligent things, like the dog feeling empathy or the dolphin being trained to help divers. Rather, it's very specifically about the "cognitive functions typically associated with higher-order primates" --- those are much higher order skills, and the example they give, the example par excellence of higher order cognitive abilities, concerns recognition and understanding of language, which are entirely absent in the dog & dolphin cases.

Does all that make sense?

Mike :)
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
https://gmat.magoosh.com/
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 316
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 6:18 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:6 members

by dhonu121 » Wed May 30, 2012 10:50 am
Mike, you have put in a lot of effort here in explaining things but all these arguments are something that cannot be known from the argument itself.
The argument just shows the vocab of Parrot and its ability to speak comprehensible stuff as its congitive ability, which makes sense and then moves on to talk about a parrot that does neither of that, rather expresses aggressiveness(Not mentioned whether it's by agressively fluttering of wings or by reprimanding the owner using English language vocab that it has). If it's by the latter method then it all makes sense, but if its by agressively fluttering of wings, then it's all about physical responses which dogs and dolphins can also show.
Had the argument mentioned that ALex, literally uses English Langauge to reprimand and not reprimand, then dogs and dolphins argument would have definitely been wrong.

I hope you get my concern.
If you've liked my post, let me know by pressing the thanks button.
Top
User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 57
Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2010 11:54 am
Location: India
Thanked: 8 times
GMAT Score:640

by chetansharma » Wed May 30, 2012 7:07 pm
dhonu121 wrote:Hi Chetan,
I am almost convinced by your point of completing stuff already given in the argument to strengthen the argument. But somewhere deep inside I feel that its because we know that the answer is E.
In strengthen questions, aren't we supposed to bring something outside of the scope of the argument to strengthen it ?
If that is the case then A and C stand full chance of being the correct answer choices.

Dolphins CAN be trained.(Thus they have the ABILITY to communicate. They will obv not talk in English/Hindi. They will make certain gesture as Alex does.)
Dogs EXHIBIT concern.(They also must be making some physical gestures like Alex.)

Hence they also strengthen the conclusion that
shows that humans and primates are not the only animals capable of using language to communicate.
Hi Dhonu,

I understand your point. But I would say that option E is indeed does bring in extra info. Also the correct answer choice when negated should weaken the conclusion.

On negating A & C there will not be conclusive point to weaken the conclusion

A - Dolphins cannot be trained to assist drivers in ocean rescues - Will not weaken the conclusion as it is not explicitly stated that assisting drivers is one of cognitive functions. Probably there might be another trait can be stated to help the conclusion.
C- Same as above- cannot weaken the conclusion
E- On Negation - Alex exhibits aggression when offered a gesture the he specifically requested. Clearly this weakens the conclusion and thus E is the correct answer

Also a small suggestion. Do not post OA and OE along with the question. As you have said, there will preference for OA :wink:

Regards,
Chetan Sharma
If my post helped you - let me know by pushing the thanks button :wink:
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1