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

Redeem

CR Problem on Unemployment

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Aug 29, 2010 9:19 am

CR Problem on Unemployment

by sherryavi » Sat Oct 22, 2011 10:25 pm
Roland: The alarming fact is that 90% of people in this country now report that they know someone who is unemployed.

Sharon: But a normal, moderate level of unemployment is 5 percent, with one out of 20 workers unemployed. So at any given time if a person knows approximately 50 workers, one or more will very likely be unemployed.

Sharon`s argument relies on the assumption that

(A) normal levels of unemployment are rarely exceeded

(B) unemployment is not normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of population.

(C) the number of people who know someone who is unemployed is always higher than 90 percent of the population.

(D) Roland is not consciously distorting the statistics he presents.

(E) knowledge that a personal acquaintance is unemployed generates more fear of losing one`s job than does knowledge of unemployment statistics.


Request you to please help me with the question, and also why do you make an option your choice of answer?

Thanks in advance
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:22 pm
Thanked: 112 times
Followed by:13 members

by smackmartine » Sat Oct 22, 2011 11:55 pm
IMO B
Few points to note for assumption questions :

1-NO NO to extreme answers.
2-Apply negation test on contender options!

(A) normal levels of unemployment are rarely exceeded (extreme)

(B) unemployment is not normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of population.

Negate B : unemployment IS normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of population.---> If this were true each person would have known more than just one or two unemployed worker(according to Sharon's statement). This means the population is so scattered that both of the author's evidences makes sense.

(C) the number of people who know someone who is unemployed is always higher than 90 percent of the population. (extreme)

(D) Roland is not consciously distorting the statistics he presents. [on GMAT we generally do not attack premises, so this answer is very obvious- So incorrect]

(E) knowledge that a personal acquaintance is unemployed generates more fear of losing one`s job than does knowledge of unemployment statistics. [out of scope, however negate the sentence and you will find that the statement has no effect on the argument]
Smack is Back ...
It takes time and effort to explain, so if my comment helped you please press Thanks button :)
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 416
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2011 2:18 pm
Location: Delhi, India
Thanked: 13 times
Followed by:9 members

by vaibhavgupta » Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:42 am
sherryavi wrote:Roland: The alarming fact is that 90% of people in this country now report that they know someone who is unemployed.

Sharon: But a normal, moderate level of unemployment is 5 percent, with one out of 20 workers unemployed. So at any given time if a person knows approximately 50 workers, one or more will very likely be unemployed.

Sharon`s argument relies on the assumption that

(A) normal levels of unemployment are rarely exceeded

(B) unemployment is not normally concentrated in geographically isolated segments of population.

(C) the number of people who know someone who is unemployed is always higher than 90 percent of the population.

(D) Roland is not consciously distorting the statistics he presents.

(E) knowledge that a personal acquaintance is unemployed generates more fear of losing one`s job than does knowledge of unemployment statistics.


Request you to please help me with the question, and also why do you make an option your choice of answer?

Thanks in advance
IMO B

Whats OA???
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 150
Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 10:04 am
Thanked: 5 times
Followed by:4 members

by thestartupguy » Fri Oct 28, 2011 1:35 am
OA: B
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:22 pm
Thanked: 112 times
Followed by:13 members

by smackmartine » Sun Oct 30, 2011 11:41 am
Wanted to add one more point on assumption:

Few points to note for assumption questions :

1-NO NO to extreme answers.
2-Apply negation test on contender options!
3- Sometimes when you get extreme words such as CANNOT, WILL NOT etc., check whether the option is trying to defend the conclusion by discounting other reasons that may harm the conclusion. This kinda options are in fact correct answers.
Smack is Back ...
It takes time and effort to explain, so if my comment helped you please press Thanks button :)
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 627
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:12 am
Thanked: 4 times
Followed by:1 members

by mankey » Wed Nov 02, 2011 8:43 am
Can someone please explain this problem. One of the users did try to provide an explanation but that is not very clear to me.

Please help.

Thanks.
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 641
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2011 1:15 am
Thanked: 149 times
Followed by:32 members
GMAT Score:760

by avik.ch » Wed Nov 02, 2011 11:51 pm
This is an OG question.

How can you weaken Sharon's argument : by showing that the distribution of unemployment is not same everywhere or not same in all demographic zone. So Sharon is assuming that this not possible here.
In order to keep the argument valid - we have to assume that this is wrong. Its assumption in defender role that save the argument from external attack.

So B is the answer.

The other way to do this is to negate each answer choice : B clearly weakens the argument if you negate it.

Hope this helps.
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1