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

Redeem

Flaw in the reasoning

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 4:39 pm
Thanked: 1 times

Flaw in the reasoning

by ranjithreddy.k9 » Thu Jun 02, 2011 6:37 pm
Alba: I don't intend to vote for Senator Frank in the next election. She is not a strong supporter of the war against crime.
Tam: But Senator Frank sponsored the latest anticrime law passed by the Senate.
Alba: If Senator Frank sponsored it, it can't be a very strong anticrime law.
Which of the following identifies the most serious logical flaw in Alba's reasoning?
(A) The facts she presents do not support her conclusion that Senator Frank is soft on crime.
(B) She assumes without proof that crime is the most important issue in the upcoming election.
(C) She argues in a circle, using an unsupported assertion to dismiss conflicting evidence.
(D) She attacks Senator Frank on personal grounds rather than on he merit as a political leader.
(E) In deciding not to vote for Senator Frank, she fails to consider issues other than crime.
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 965
Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 12:52 am
Thanked: 156 times
Followed by:34 members
GMAT Score:720

by vineeshp » Thu Jun 02, 2011 7:15 pm
(A) The facts she presents do not support her conclusion that Senator Frank is soft on crime. - She does not present any such facts.
(B) She assumes without proof that crime is the most important issue in the upcoming election. - It is the issue which she is concerned with.
(C) She argues in a circle, using an unsupported assertion to dismiss conflicting evidence. - I agree, she states that the latest law must be soft because he is not a strong supporter of crime. She does not prove so. Hence the answer?
(D) She attacks Senator Frank on personal grounds rather than on he merit as a political leader. - The issue is related only to war on crime.
(E) In deciding not to vote for Senator Frank, she fails to consider issues other than crime. - Irrelevant.
OA C
Vineesh,
Just telling you what I know and think. I am not the expert. :)
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1309
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2011 5:34 am
Location: India
Thanked: 310 times
Followed by:123 members
GMAT Score:750

by cans » Thu Jun 02, 2011 7:19 pm
IMO C
If my post helped you- let me know by pushing the thanks button ;)

Contact me about long distance tutoring!
[email protected]

Cans!!
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 4:39 pm
Thanked: 1 times

by ranjithreddy.k9 » Thu Jun 02, 2011 7:36 pm
Yes ans is C.. But whats wrong with E ?
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 1448
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 9:55 am
Location: India
Thanked: 375 times
Followed by:53 members

by Frankenstein » Thu Jun 02, 2011 7:54 pm
ranjithreddy.k9 wrote:Yes ans is C.. But whats wrong with E ?
Hi,
'Issues other than crime' is out of scope.
Cheers!

Things are not what they appear to be... nor are they otherwise
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1325
Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2009 6:24 am
Thanked: 105 times
Followed by:14 members

by vikram4689 » Thu Jun 02, 2011 9:20 pm
This is peculiar type where an unsupported assumptions is used to support a conclusion.... as rightly mentioned ans is C.


A - it does support but there is no evidence for her assumption.
B - irrelevant
C - Correct
D - irrelevant
E - irrelevant ( we are concerned only with the flaw she made and NOT with other issues)

Hope this helps.
Premise: If you like my post
Conclusion : Press the Thanks Button ;)
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 150
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2009 7:36 am
Location: gurgaon
Thanked: 8 times
Followed by:2 members

by itsmebharat » Fri Jun 03, 2011 12:07 am
IMO C , good explanation by @vikram
I am not an Expert, please feel free to suggest if there is an error.
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 934
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 5:16 am
Location: AAMCHI MUMBAI LOCAL
Thanked: 63 times
Followed by:14 members

by [email protected] » Tue Feb 14, 2012 4:56 am
Alba: I don't intend to vote for Senator Frank in the next election. She is not a strong supporter of the war against crime.
Tam: But Senator Frank sponsored the latest anticrime law passed by the Senate.
Alba: If Senator Frank sponsored it, it can't be a very strong anticrime law.
Which of the following identifies the most serious logical flaw in Alba's reasoning?
(A) The facts she presents do not support her conclusion that Senator Frank is soft on crime.
(B) She assumes without proof that crime is the most important issue in the upcoming election.
(C) She argues in a circle, using an unsupported assertion to dismiss conflicting evidence.
(D) She attacks Senator Frank on personal grounds rather than on he merit as a political leader.
(E) In deciding not to vote for Senator Frank, she fails to consider issues other than crime.


OA is C. Alba makes 2 conclusions each of them without any premise and she goes in circular reasoning. Also counters Tam's evidence without any strong premise Hence C.

Marking option C was rather simple...
IT IS TIME TO BEAT THE GMAT

LEARNING, APPLICATION AND TIMING IS THE FACT OF GMAT AND LIFE AS WELL... KEEP PLAYING!!!

Whenever you feel that my post really helped you to learn something new, please press on the 'THANK' button.
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1