Editorialist

This topic has expert replies
Legendary Member
Posts: 2789
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 12:19 am
Location: Chennai, India
Thanked: 206 times
Followed by:43 members
GMAT Score:640

Editorialist

by GmatKiss » Mon Mar 05, 2012 10:51 am
Editorialist: Despite the importance it seems to have in our lives, money does not really exist. This is evident from the fact that all that would be needed to make money disappear would be a universal loss of belief in it. We witness this phenomenon on a small scale daily in the rises and falls of financial markets, whose fluctuations are often entirely independent of concrete causes and are the result of mere beliefs of investors.

The conclusion of the editorialist's argument can be properly drawn if which one of the following is assumed?

A) Anything that exists would continue to exist even if everyone were to stop believing in it.

B) Only if one can have mistaken beliefs about a thing does that thing exist, strictly speaking.

C) In order to exist, an entity must have practical consequences for those who believe in it.

D) If everyone believes in something, then that thing exists.

E) Whatever is true of money is true of financial markets generally.

IMO: D
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Legendary Member
Posts: 581
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 7:53 am
Thanked: 52 times
Followed by:5 members

by killer1387 » Mon Mar 05, 2012 10:13 pm
Come on man, what kinnda question is this m thrown off the track, none of the options even stays close to be a contender. Hope these kinnda questions stays out of the GMAT league.
Amen..!!

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] » Mon Mar 05, 2012 10:34 pm
Editorialist: Despite the importance it seems to have in our lives, money does not really exist. This is evident from the fact that all that would be needed to make money disappear would be a universal loss of belief in it. We witness this phenomenon on a small scale daily in the rises and falls of financial markets, whose fluctuations are often entirely independent of concrete causes and are the result of mere beliefs of investors.

The conclusion of the editorialist's argument can be properly drawn if which one of the following is assumed?

A) Anything that exists would continue to exist even if everyone were to stop believing in it.

B) Only if one can have mistaken beliefs about a thing does that thing exist
, strictly speaking.

C) In order to exist, an entity must have practical consequences for those who believe in it.

D) If everyone believes in something, then that thing exists.

E) Whatever is true of money is true of financial markets generally.


I came down to the options B and E. Cancelled out B as the stimulus does not talk about mistaken beliefs or the editorialist does not talk about the categories of the beliefs. It just talks about beliefs.

Please GMATKISS give the OA...
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.

Legendary Member
Posts: 581
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2011 7:53 am
Thanked: 52 times
Followed by:5 members

by killer1387 » Tue Mar 06, 2012 12:07 am
IMO A.

Finally , could arrive at something. It was a tough time no doubts. What is the source??

Editorialist: Despite the importance it seems to have in our lives, money does not really exist. This is evident from the fact that all that would be needed to make money disappear would be a universal loss of belief in it. We witness this phenomenon on a small scale daily in the rises and falls of financial markets, whose fluctuations are often entirely independent of concrete causes and are the result of mere beliefs of investors.

The conclusion of the editorialist's argument can be properly drawn if which one of the following is assumed?

A) Anything that exists would continue to exist even if everyone were to stop believing in it.
--> only this remains after POE.

B) Only if one can have mistaken beliefs about a thing does that thing exist, strictly speaking.
--> out of scope

C) In order to exist, an entity must have practical consequences for those who believe in it.
--> out of scope

D) If everyone believes in something, then that thing exists.

-->
belief-->existence
in argument it is "to make money disappear would be a universal loss of belief in it. "
i.e. no belief --> no existence
so it is existence--> belief
i.e. if this is assumed then argument stands. so D wouldnot be.

E) Whatever is true of money is true of financial markets generally.
--> "generally" makes the conclusion doubtful

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1239
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 6:25 am
Thanked: 233 times
Followed by:26 members
GMAT Score:680

by sam2304 » Tue Mar 06, 2012 4:05 am
IMO A.

I agree with killer1387's explanation for eliminating D.

Definitely not a GMAT question. Seems to be purely based on logic. Is it an LSAT question ? I have seen these sort of questions in LSAT prep materials, but it didn't really help with GMAT prep in fact it was detrimental. GMAT questions are purely intuition based and more real life scenarios, whereas LSAT questions are pure logic. You get to train yourself in the wrong way i would say. The more tougher the GMAT questions are the more closer two options are among them is the right answer and there is no way you can get to crack those questions practicing LSAT questions, which are logic based.
Getting defeated is just a temporary notion, giving it up is what makes it permanent.
https://gmatandbeyond.blogspot.in/