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.
Source: OG 13.
In virtually any industry
This topic has expert replies
- vk_vinayak
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 502
- Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 11:36 pm
- Thanked: 99 times
- Followed by:21 members
Timer
00:00
Your Answer
A
B
C
D
E
Global Stats
- VK
I will (Learn. Recognize. Apply)
I will (Learn. Recognize. Apply)
- Bill@VeritasPrep
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 1248
- Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 2:57 pm
- Location: Everywhere
- Thanked: 503 times
- Followed by:192 members
- GMAT Score:780
Timer
00:00
Your Answer
A
B
C
D
E
Global Stats
More technology = more productivity
Productivity in Parland > productivity in Vergia
Technology in Parland > technology in Vergia
A--No; the conclusion is the combination of the two premises, not simply a restatement of one of them.
B--I do not see any inconsistencies in the evidence.
C--correct; it is entirely possible that other factors have led to Parland being more productive. Better resources, more education, etc.
D--we don't really have information about timing here.
E--nope, no circular reasoning going on here.
Productivity in Parland > productivity in Vergia
Technology in Parland > technology in Vergia
A--No; the conclusion is the combination of the two premises, not simply a restatement of one of them.
B--I do not see any inconsistencies in the evidence.
C--correct; it is entirely possible that other factors have led to Parland being more productive. Better resources, more education, etc.
D--we don't really have information about timing here.
E--nope, no circular reasoning going on here.
Join Veritas Prep's 2010 Instructor of the Year, Matt Douglas for GMATT Mondays
Visit the Veritas Prep Blog
Try the FREE Veritas Prep Practice Test
Visit the Veritas Prep Blog
Try the FREE Veritas Prep Practice Test
- Gaurav 2013-fall
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 307
- Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 9:45 pm
- Thanked: 12 times
- GMAT Score:700
Timer
00:00
Your Answer
A
B
C
D
E
Global Stats
+1 for C
Let me tell you something you already know. The world ain't all sunshine and rainbows. It is a very mean and nasty place and it will beat you to your knees and keep you there permanently if you let it. You, me, or nobody is gonna hit as hard as life. But it ain't how hard you hit; it's about how hard you can get hit, and keep moving forward. How much you can take, and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done. Now, if you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hit, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you are because of him, or her, or anybody. Cowards do that and that ain't you. You're better than that! (Rocky VI)