crimes and convictions

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 108
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 8:15 am
Location: 127.0.0.1
Thanked: 15 times

crimes and convictions

by gmatrix » Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:14 pm
A LSAT CR:OA-later
Attachments
lsat cr convictions n crimes.JPG
Life is all about ass; you're either covering it, laughing it off, kicking it, kissing it, busting it, trying to get a piece of it, or behaving like one.
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 250
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 2:21 am
Thanked: 10 times

by saurabhmahajan » Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:58 pm
IMO: C
Thanks and regards,
Saurabh Mahajan

I can understand you not winning,but i will not forgive you for not trying.

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1893
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 11:48 pm
Thanked: 215 times
Followed by:7 members

by kvcpk » Mon Oct 25, 2010 10:10 pm
IMO D.

Before comparing the effect of 2 entities, the quantities should be taken into consideration.

Here we are comparing the number of conviction cases of public defendents vs private defendants.

Hence we need to make sure that the quantites are balanced before comparison.

Only D addresses this point.
"Once you start working on something,
don't be afraid of failure and don't abandon it.
People who work sincerely are the happiest."
Chanakya quotes (Indian politician, strategist and writer, 350 BC-275BC)

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 25, 2010 10:23 pm
Hi,

this is another causal or explain the phenomenon argument.

Phenomenon: criminals who commit lucrative crimes are more successful at avoiding conviction than are street criminals.

The author's explanation: rich white-collar crime commiting defendants can afford better lawyers.

This argument can be weakened by pointing to an alternative explanation: for example, maybe the reason street criminals are more likely to be successfully prosecuted is that they are more likely to actually be guitly of the crimes with which they are charged. Conversely, this argument can be strengthened by ruling out such an explanation--that's exactly what the correct answer, choice D, does. (If you deny choice D, you will see that the argument is weakened; hence, choice D strengthens).

***

Takeaway:
--recognize causal or explain the phenomenon arguments, as they often show up in stn/wkn questions. Such arguments can be weakened by introducing an alternative explanation and strengthened by removing an alternative explanation.

***

Choices A, B and E actually weaken the argument.
Choice C is about NUMBER while the argument was about conviction RATE. Thus, choice C is irrelevant.
Kaplan Teacher in Toronto