Judges CR

This topic has expert replies
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 51
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 7:26 am
Thanked: 1 times

Judges CR

by varunkh70 » Wed Sep 16, 2009 5:15 pm
Request you please explain elimination of incorrect answers

9. Civil trials often involve great complexities that are
beyond the capacities of jurors to understand. As a
result, jurors' decisions in such trials are frequently
incorrect. Justice would therefore be better served if
the more complex trials were decided by judges
rather than juries.

The argument above depends on which of the
following assumptions?
(A) A majority of civil trials involve complexities
that jurors are not capable of understanding.
(B) The judges who would decide complex civil
trials would be better able to understand the
complexities of those trials than jurors are.
(C) The judges who would preside over civil trials
would disallow the most complex sorts of
evidence from being introduced into those
trials.
(D) Jurors' decisions are frequently incorrect even
in those civil trials that do not involve great
complexities.
(E) The sole reason in favor of having juries decide
civil trials is the supposition that their
decisions will almost always be correct.
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 434
Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 9:48 pm
Location: Bangalore
Thanked: 6 times
GMAT Score:600

by viju9162 » Wed Sep 16, 2009 10:42 pm
Is the answer "B" ?
"Native of" is used for a individual while "Native to" is used for a large group

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 85
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 2:21 am
Thanked: 1 times

Re: Judges CR

by sudi760mba » Thu Sep 17, 2009 12:01 am
I would think it is B for the following reasons:

Civil Trials involve complexity which is beyond the comprehension of jurors. Assumption: It would be within the comprehension level of judges.
Jurors Lack of understanding => incorrect decisions.
Judge understand => correct decisions.

(A) A majority of civil trials involve complexities
that jurors are not capable of understanding.
Majority seems extreme. The passage doesn't even suggest that.

(C) The judges who would preside over civil trials
would disallow the most complex sorts of
evidence from being introduced into those
trials.
Nothing in the passage suggests that. There's isn't any evidence to suggest that a subsect of judges would even do such a thing. Beyond what is stated.

(D) Jurors' decisions are frequently incorrect even
in those civil trials that do not involve great
complexities.

Nothing in the passage suggests that. Goes beyond the scope of the argument.

The sole reason in favor of having juries decide
civil trials is the supposition that their
decisions will almost always be correct.

This contradicts what was stated earlier.
varunkh70 wrote:Request you please explain elimination of incorrect answers

9. Civil trials often involve great complexities that are
beyond the capacities of jurors to understand. As a
result, jurors' decisions in such trials are frequently
incorrect. Justice would therefore be better served if
the more complex trials were decided by judges
rather than juries.

The argument above depends on which of the
following assumptions?
(A) A majority of civil trials involve complexities
that jurors are not capable of understanding.
(B) The judges who would decide complex civil
trials would be better able to understand the
complexities of those trials than jurors are.
(C) The judges who would preside over civil trials
would disallow the most complex sorts of
evidence from being introduced into those
trials.
(D) Jurors' decisions are frequently incorrect even
in those civil trials that do not involve great
complexities.
(E) The sole reason in favor of having juries decide
civil trials is the supposition that their
decisions will almost always be correct.

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 344
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 5:40 am
Thanked: 28 times
Followed by:3 members
GMAT Score:700

by sunnyjohn » Thu Sep 17, 2009 12:34 am
IMO:B

CLEAR WINNER

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 51
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 7:26 am
Thanked: 1 times

by varunkh70 » Thu Sep 17, 2009 2:22 am
OA is B. But B seems to be mentioned directly in the argument and books say that assumptions are never stated in the argument. This is what puzzles me a bit.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 300
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 10:33 am

by kris77 » Sun May 15, 2016 4:20 pm
I will Go with option B in this case.