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

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

OG 2016 CR 16

Expert replies
by Crystal W » Mon May 16, 2016 1:30 am
In virtually any industry, technological improvements increase labor productivity, which is the output of goods and services per person-hour worked. In Parland's industries, labor productivity is significantly higher than it is in Vergia's industries. Clearly, therefore, Parland's industries must, on the whole, be further advanced technologically than Vergia's are.

The argument is most vulnerable to which of the following criticisms?

A. It offers a conclusion that is no more than a paraphrase of one of the pieces of information provided in its support.

B. It presents as evidence in support of a claim information that is inconsistent with other evidence presented in support of the same claim.

C. It takes one possible cause of a condition to be the actual cause of that condition without considering any other possible causes.

D. It takes a condition to be the effect of something that happened only after the condition already existed.

E. It makes a distinction that presupposes the truth of the conclusion that is to be established.
I understand the problem in the situation. Can someone explain the Choice D and E? I am not really sure the meanings of thes two sentences?
Thanks in advance
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by MartyMurray » Tue May 17, 2016 10:53 am
D. It takes a condition to be the effect of something that happened only after the condition already existed.

Translation: It says that something was caused by something else, but the cause actually happened after the supposed effect.

E. It makes a distinction that presupposes the truth of the conclusion that is to be established.

The argument makes a point based on the idea that it's own conclusion is correct. In other words, somehow the argument is based on its own conclusion. Here's a ridiculous example

Amanda has blond hair and blonds prefer apples to oranges. I know that because Amanda has blond hair. So she must prefer apples to oranges. So girls with blond hair must prefer apples to oranges.

Wait a minute!!! Goes in a circle to nowhere.
Marty Murray
Perfect Scoring Tutor With Over a Decade of Experience
MartyMurrayCoaching.com
Contact me at [email protected] for a free consultation.
Join the discussion

by Crystal W » Wed May 18, 2016 4:47 am
Marty Murray wrote:D. It takes a condition to be the effect of something that happened only after the condition already existed.

Translation: It says that something was caused by something else, but the cause actually happened after the supposed effect.

E. It makes a distinction that presupposes the truth of the conclusion that is to be established.

The argument makes a point based on the idea that it's own conclusion is correct. In other words, somehow the argument is based on its own conclusion. Here's a ridiculous example

Amanda has blond hair and blonds prefer apples to oranges. I know that because Amanda has blond hair. So she must prefer apples to oranges. So girls with blond hair must prefer apples to oranges.

Wait a minute!!! Goes in a circle to nowhere.
Thnk you for your reply but I am still confused especially for your example.
Join the discussion

by MartyMurray » Sun May 22, 2016 2:42 am
Crystal W wrote:

E. It makes a distinction that presupposes the truth of the conclusion that is to be established.

The argument makes a point based on the idea that it's own conclusion is correct. In other words, somehow the argument is based on its own conclusion. Here's a ridiculous example

Amanda has blond hair and blonds prefer apples to oranges. I know that because Amanda has blond hair. So she must prefer apples to oranges. So girls with blond hair must prefer apples to oranges.

Wait a minute!!! Goes in a circle to nowhere.
Thnk you for your reply but I am still confused especially for your example.[/quote]

D. It takes a condition to be the effect of something that happened only after the condition already existed.

Consider a cause effect situation. Generally the cause must happen before the effect occurs. For instance, first rain falls, and after that plants grow. First a person eats too much, then he feels sick.

So cause BEFORE effect.

D says that the argument attributes an effect to a cause that occurred AFTER the effect. An argument that does that does not make sense.

E. It makes a distinction that presupposes the truth of the conclusion that is to be established.

An argument has to support, via the premises, its conclusion. The conclusion is the point of the argument.

Consider this example.

John has to work late. So he will not make it to the event.

We only know that John will not make it to the event because John has to work late.

E says that the argument is flawed because somehow the conclusion is used to support part of the argument. That does not make sense.

Consider this ridiculous example of a conclusion supporting itself.

I know that John will be late, because John will be late.

What E says is not as simple as the above example, but E says that some distinction, something that the argument says, its supported by the conclusion. "presupposes the truth of the conclusion" means "decides that the conclusion is true before it is proven."

Here's an example.

I can tell that John does not drive as fast as Henry does, because people who drive faster arrive first. So John will not arrive first.

That argument does not make sense. The conclusion is "So John will not arrive first."

The conclusion supports the idea that John does not drive as fast as Henry does. The argument goes around in a circle, but does not prove anything.

The statement, "John does not drive as fast as Henry does," presupposes the truth of the conclusion, "John will not arrive first."

John will not arrive first, so John does not drive as fast, so John will not arrive first, so John does not drive as fast ...
Marty Murray
Perfect Scoring Tutor With Over a Decade of Experience
MartyMurrayCoaching.com
Contact me at [email protected] for a free consultation.
Join the discussion