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

Redeem

Trust

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Legendary Member
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:00 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:3 members

Trust

by ssgmatter » Fri Apr 02, 2010 10:46 pm
8. Trust, which cannot be sustained in the absence of
mutual respect, is essential to any long-lasting
relationship, personal or professional. However,
personal relationships, such as marriage or friendship,
additionally require natural affinity. If a personal
relationship is to endure, it must be supported by the
twin pillars of mutual respect and affinity.
If the statements above are true, then which one of the
following must also be true?
(A) A friendship supported solely by trust and
mutual respect will not be long-lasting.
(B) In the context of any professional relationship,
mutual respect presupposes trust.
(C) If a personal relationship is supported by mutual
respect and affinity, it will last a long time.
(D) Personal relationships, such as marriage or
friendship, are longer-lasting than professional
relationships.
(E) Basing a marriage on a natural affinity will
ensure that it will endure.
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:38 am
Thanked: 137 times
Followed by:5 members

by thephoenix » Fri Apr 02, 2010 11:10 pm
IMO C

a) not supported by para
b)oos
d)oos
e)contardicts
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:00 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:3 members

by ssgmatter » Fri Apr 02, 2010 11:14 pm
well i marked C too but OA is A...

This is LSAT question

well OE says this for wrong C

(C) The classic confusion of necessity and sufficiency.
Contrary to (C), respect and affinity are necessary for
a long-lasting personal relationship but may not be
sufficient for it; other factors may be needed as well.

What does this mean?
Anybody please explain
Regards,
pHIL
Top
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:13 pm
Location: Toronto
Thanked: 539 times
Followed by:164 members
GMAT Score:800

by Testluv » Sat Apr 03, 2010 12:13 am
Trust, which cannot be sustained in the absence of mutual respect, is essential to any long-lasting relationship, personal or professional.
This sentence tells us that we NEED mutual respect for trust, and that we need trust for any long-lasting relationship. Therefore, so far, we know that we NEED mutual respect for any long-lasting relationship.
However, personal relationships, such as marriage or friendship, additionally require natural affinity.
So, for a long lasting personal relationship, in addition to trust, we also NEED natural affinity.

So we need both for a long-lasting personal relationship. That means, without both MUTUAL RESPECT and NATURAL AFFINITY, a personal relationship will not last. In other words, if we only have one of them, then a personal relationship will not last. That's what choice A, the correct answer, says.

_________


On the difference between necessity and sufficiency:

We need gas to drive a car but gas in the tank won't guarantee that we will be able to drive a car (because we also need a functioning transmssion, inflated tires, a steering wheel...etc). In other words, gas is necessary for driving a car but not sufficient for driving a car.

_________

GMAT would never test the distinction between necessity and sufficiency as vigorously as this LSAT question does! GMAT would never test formal logic skills in such a technical way.
Kaplan Teacher in Toronto
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 232
Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 10:47 pm
Thanked: 10 times

by Phirozz » Sat Apr 03, 2010 12:38 am
If A implies B, then 'not B' implies 'not A'


As per ques stem ''If a personal relationship is to endure, it must be supported by both mutual respect and affinity''

Here A = long lasting relationship
and B = supported by both mutual respect and affinity

So we can conclude 'not B' implies 'not A' ie ''If a personal relation is not supported by both mutual respect and affinity, its not long lasting'', which is not present in any of the options.

But we cannot conclude that B implies A ie if a relation is supported by mutual respect and affinity, it ll long last. So option C is clearly out of scope.


As per 2nd sentence personal relationships such as marriage require natural affinity. This is an affirmative statement. So we can conclude that in the absense of natural affinity, friendship will not be long lasting. This is what option A says.

P and Q together lead to R. We can say that only P doe not lead to R which is option A.
Top
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:13 pm
Location: Toronto
Thanked: 539 times
Followed by:164 members
GMAT Score:800

by Testluv » Sat Apr 03, 2010 12:44 am
Phirozz is 100% correct:

In this question, we can translate the sentences into conditional statements, applying the rules of contraposing, as well as the transitive property of multiple conditional statements. If you are mathematically or technically inclined, you may well prefer this approach, and there's nothing wrong with that.

You can also just reason out the concepts of necessity and sufficiency in a verbal manner, as I did in my post above.

But, I feel I should reiterate that studying LSAT questions that test formal logic this heavily does not effectivly contribute to GMAT preparation.
Kaplan Teacher in Toronto
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:38 am
Thanked: 137 times
Followed by:5 members

by thephoenix » Sat Apr 03, 2010 1:15 am
Testluv wrote:Phirozz is 100% correct:

In this question, we can translate the sentences into conditional statements, applying the rules of contraposing, as well as the transitive property of multiple conditional statements. If you are mathematically or technically inclined, you may well prefer this approach, and there's nothing wrong with that.

You can also just reason out the concepts of necessity and sufficiency in a verbal manner, as I did in my post above.

But, I feel I should reiterate that studying LSAT questions that test formal logic this heavily does not effectivly contribute to GMAT preparation.
can u pls tell me whats wrong with C and other choices
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:00 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:3 members

by ssgmatter » Sat Apr 03, 2010 1:18 am
Thankyou Testluv for sharing your perspectives on a question like this.

So please tell us as to what extent on should study the LSAT questions to avoid wastage of time and concentrate on the subject which is most relevant for GMAT per se.

Please advise.

Many thanks!

Warm Regards,
Phil
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:38 am
Thanked: 137 times
Followed by:5 members

by thephoenix » Sat Apr 03, 2010 1:20 am
hey testluv
pls suggest some GMAT books for tackling CR,
i wud appreciate if u can suggest some ways to attack different types of CR , namely Assumption,strengthening(the diff b/n two),must be true,inference types, evaulate the argument , Resolve the paradox, weaken the arg,
i am using Power Score Bible and kaplan adv , but i found it hard to implement the same under time pressure.
suggest some ways for practicing CR
Top
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:13 pm
Location: Toronto
Thanked: 539 times
Followed by:164 members
GMAT Score:800

by Testluv » Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:23 pm
can u pls tell me whats wrong with C and other choices
This clause:
Trust, which cannot be sustained in the absence of mutual respect,
tells us that mutual respect is necessary for trust. The necessary condition always goes on the right hand side of a conditional statement. (And the sufficient condition on the left). Therefore, this clause yields:

IF trust, THEN mutual respect. Or, writing in a quasi-algebraic fashion: Trust --> Mutual respect.

The rest of the first sentence tells us that trust is ESSENTIAL (ie, necessary) for any long-lasting relationship. Thus:

If there is a long-lasting relationship, we know that it has trust. Or: Long-lasting relationsip --> Trust.

Because "trust" is the right hand side of the second statement but the left hand side of the first, we can connect them:

Long-lasting relationship --> Trust --> Mutual respect. Or: Long-lasting relationship --> Mutual respect.

The second sentence tells us that long-lasting personal relationships also REQUIRE natural affinity. Thus:

IF long-lasting personal relationship, THEN natural affinity (in addition to trust and mutual respect).

Choices B, C and E all mistreat necessary conditions as sufficient; they all improperly reverse (without negating) a conditional statement above.

Choice D is wrong simply because the passage never proved which kind of relationship lasts longer.
Kaplan Teacher in Toronto
Top
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:13 pm
Location: Toronto
Thanked: 539 times
Followed by:164 members
GMAT Score:800

by Testluv » Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:31 pm
So please tell us as to what extent on should study the LSAT questions to avoid wastage of time and concentrate on the subject which is most relevant for GMAT per se.

This is a good and important question if you've chosen to practice with LSAT materials. First, we need to recognize that LSAT is interested in testing different skills from GMAT. Ideally, an instructor who teaches both tests should vet LSAT questions for you. If you don't have that resource available, you need to be very careful. If a question is testing formal logic concepts, and if you've recognized what that looks like, then you should avoid those questions. If you see answer choices that are using "most" vs "some" vs "any", then that question is testing loose formal logic and you can ignore it.

Additionally, there are several question types on the LSAT that I have yet to see in any officially released GMAT materials:

parallel reasoning;
method of argument;
all the principle question variants;
point at issue;


LSAT qustion types that also appear on the GMAT are as follows:
assumption;
stn/wkn;
flaw (although this is way more common on the LSAT);
inference (although LSAT inference questions often involve formal logic--such as this one!)
main point (although this is rare on the GMAT);
paradox;
role of statement (these are bold-face questions on the GMAT); and
relevant information questions
Kaplan Teacher in Toronto
Top
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1302
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 2:13 pm
Location: Toronto
Thanked: 539 times
Followed by:164 members
GMAT Score:800

by Testluv » Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:34 pm
pls suggest some GMAT books for tackling CR,



For practice, by far the BEST materals are recent offiically released GMAT questions, which you can find in the following sources:

OG 11
OG 12
OG VERBAL SUPPLEMENT
GMAT PREP

For strategy, obviously, I am going to stand by any Kaplan publication. IMO, Kaplan is extremely clear and focussed, and provides excellent techniques for the various question types.
i wud appreciate if u can suggest some ways to attack different types of CR , namely Assumption,strengthening(the diff b/n two),must be true,inference types, evaulate the argument , Resolve the paradox, weaken the arg,
Sorry! That's a bit much for one post; I would end up writing a book! I have a long history of CR posts on this website, and you would certainly glean some great strategies from looking at my previous posts. Also, Stacey and Ron have posted some wonderful strategies in their previou posts, as has Stuart.
Last edited by Testluv on Sat Apr 03, 2010 8:53 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Kaplan Teacher in Toronto
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:00 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:3 members

by ssgmatter » Sat Apr 03, 2010 8:40 pm
Thankyou Testluv for sharing your indepth analysis and perspectives. They are just invaluable.

Thanks a ton once again!

Warm Regards,
Phil
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 10:23 am

by joseph32 » Mon May 16, 2016 12:14 am
I believe the answer should be C
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1