Comedian with unhappy childhood

This topic has expert replies
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 2:39 am
GMAT Score:620

Comedian with unhappy childhood

by gmat620 » Fri Oct 16, 2009 11:41 am
All of the best comedians have had unhappy childhoods. Yet, many people who have had happy childhoods are good comedians, and some good comedians who have had miserably unhappy childhoods are happy adults.

If the statements in the passage are true, which one of the following CANNOT be true?


(A) The proportion of good comedians who had unhappy childhoods is greater than the proportion of the best comedians who did.
(B) Some good comedians have had unhappy childhoods and are unhappy adults.
(C) Most of the best comedians are happy adults.
(D) More good comedians have had unhappy childhoods than have had happy childhoods.
(E) The proportion of comedians who are happy adults is higher than the proportion who are unhappy adults.

OA to be followed after some discussion

Legendary Member
Posts: 869
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2009 3:49 pm
Location: California
Thanked: 13 times
Followed by:3 members

by heshamelaziry » Fri Oct 16, 2009 11:32 pm
IMO C

Legendary Member
Posts: 1161
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 2:52 am
Location: Sydney
Thanked: 23 times
Followed by:1 members

by mehravikas » Sat Oct 17, 2009 2:03 pm
IMO - C

I am not too sure. A and E can be ruled out because there is not enough information in the passage to prove whether they are true or false. 'B' is stated in the argument and the comparison given in 'D' cannot be proved to be true or false.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 128
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2009 1:46 pm
Thanked: 1 times

by fruti_yum » Mon Oct 19, 2009 5:27 pm
mehravikas wrote:IMO - C

I am not too sure. A and E can be ruled out because there is not enough information in the passage to prove whether they are true or false. 'B' is stated in the argument and the comparison given in 'D' cannot be proved to be true or false.
What's the source of this question?

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 » Mon Oct 19, 2009 6:54 pm
The answer must be A. The first sentence says "All of the best comedians have had unhappy childhoods." Some of the good comedians have had unhappy childhoods. Since all of the best comedians have had unhappy childhoods, it must be impossible that there is a higher fraction of good comedians with unhappy childhoods.

Choice C while tempting could be true: just because all of the best comedians have had unhappy childhoods does not mean that any of them are unhappy as adults.

Hope this helps.

Legendary Member
Posts: 1161
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 2:52 am
Location: Sydney
Thanked: 23 times
Followed by:1 members

by mehravikas » Thu Oct 22, 2009 11:50 am
OA and source of the question please?

Legendary Member
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
Thanked: 173 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

by gmatmachoman » Sat Oct 24, 2009 3:19 am
IMO D seems a proper fit.

Cannot be true questions are simply like" identify the false statement".

(A) The proportion of good comedians who had unhappy childhoods is greater than the proportion of the best comedians who did.

CANT SAY....AS WE DONT KNOW THE EXACT FIGURES..
(B) Some good comedians have had unhappy childhoods and are unhappy adults.

NO MENTION ABOUT THAT IN THE ARGUMENT.
(C) Most of the best comedians are happy adults.
NO MENTION ABOUT THAT IN THE ARGUMENT
(D) More good comedians have had unhappy childhoods than have had happy childhoods.

CLEARLY MENTIONED IN TTHE ARGUMENT.
(E) The proportion of comedians who are happy adults is higher than the proportion who are unhappy adults

CANT SAY...

IMO D SEEMS TO BE A PROPER FIT.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 371
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 2:48 am
Thanked: 27 times
GMAT Score:740

by 2010gmat » Sat Oct 24, 2009 3:48 am
clearly A...all the best comedians have had unhappy childhood --> 100% best comedians unhappy childhood

while the proportion of good comedians who had unhappy childhood is not 100% because many of them had happy childhood...

A states this only..

Legendary Member
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
Thanked: 173 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

by gmatmachoman » Sat Oct 24, 2009 3:56 am
2010gmat wrote:clearly A...all the best comedians have had unhappy childhood --> 100% best comedians unhappy childhood

while the proportion of good comedians who had unhappy childhood is not 100% because many of them had happy childhood...

A states this only..
@2010GMAT...
Since we dont know the exact figures ,how could u deduce the proportions??

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 371
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 2:48 am
Thanked: 27 times
GMAT Score:740

by 2010gmat » Sat Oct 24, 2009 10:31 am
why do we need exact nos here??

All of the best comedians have had unhappy childhoods. --> 100% of best comdeians have had unhappy childhood ... i think we dont need exact nos to find this...

{lets us assume there are 10 best comedians...and as per the argument all 10 have had unhappy CH --> 100% best comedians = unhappy CH}

many people who have had happy childhoods are good comedians --> there are some good comdeians who have had happy childhood ... this simply means that proportion of good comedians who have had Unhappy CH cant be 100%

so A cannot be true ...

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 Oct 24, 2009 3:04 pm
Actually, the proportion of good comedians with unhappy childhoods could be 100% (because "some" includes the possibility of "all"). But, even then, it still must be impossible that there is a greater fraction of good comedians with unhappy childhoods than there is with the best comedians.

As per my post above, choice A must be impossible, and is therefore correct.
Last edited by Testluv on Mon Oct 26, 2009 9:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
Kaplan Teacher in Toronto

Legendary Member
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
Thanked: 173 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

by gmatmachoman » Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:16 am

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 95
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 2:39 am
GMAT Score:620

by gmat620 » Mon Oct 26, 2009 10:30 pm
hey friends, sorry for the delay.

OA:A

Legendary Member
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
Thanked: 173 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

by gmatmachoman » Tue Oct 27, 2009 2:38 am
2010gmat wrote:why do we need exact nos here??

All of the best comedians have had unhappy childhoods. --> 100% of best comdeians have had unhappy childhood ... i think we dont need exact nos to find this...

{lets us assume there are 10 best comedians...and as per the argument all 10 have had unhappy CH --> 100% best comedians = unhappy CH}

many people who have had happy childhoods are good comedians --> there are some good comdeians who have had happy childhood ... this simply means that proportion of good comedians who have had Unhappy CH cant be 100%

so A cannot be true ...

@2010Gmat & TestLuv\

Lets assume there are 100 comedians.O

No of Best Comedians : 10
No of Good Comedians with with happyness in CH: 70
No of good comedians with unhappy CH: 20.

So now the proprtion of Best comedians is less than proprtyion of comedians with unhappy CH.

This contradicts option A.

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 371
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 2:48 am
Thanked: 27 times
GMAT Score:740

by 2010gmat » Tue Oct 27, 2009 9:08 am
@2010Gmat & TestLuv\

Lets assume there are 100 comedians.O

No of Best Comedians : 10
No of Good Comedians with with happyness in CH: 70
No of good comedians with unhappy CH: 20.

So now the proprtion of Best comedians is less than proprtyion of comedians with unhappy CH.

This contradicts option A.
------------------------------------------------------

as per the stimuli -- all the best comedians have unhappy childhood... therefore, acc to the nos above best comedians with unhappy childhood = 10

so 10 in 10 best comedins have had unhappy childhood... this gives a proportion of 100%

now you said there are 90 good comedians...70 with happy childhood and 20 with unhappy childhood

we are concerned only with 20 good comedians who have had unhappy childhood...

there fore proportion of good comedians who had unhappy childhood = 20/(70+20)

= 20/90

Let us take another case .. say all the 90 good comedians had unhappy childhood...now the proportion of good comedians having unhappy childhood = 90/90 = 100%

It can never be greater than the proportion of best comedians having unhappy childhood

hence A...Key is Best comedians with UNHAPPY CHILDHOOD AND good comedians WITH UNHAPPY CHILDHOOD...