Critical Reasoning

The coming economic recovery will surely be strong. Most of the economists in the investment companies now aggree this is so, though the leading academic economists still think otherwise. since the investment companies' economists are risking their jobs when they make forecasts, wheras academic economists have lifelong tenure, it generally makes sense to take the investment companies' economists more seriously.

The main conclusion of the argument is supported only

A. by comparing the number of experts who agree with the conclusion with the number who disagree with the conclusion

B. through an assessment of the likely risks and consequences of believing one or another strand of expert opinion

C. through projection from the economic prospects for investment companies to the economic prospects for the economy as a whole

D. through an assessment of the relative reliability of the experts who agree with the conclusion as compared with that of those who disagree

E. by attacking the character of those experts who disagree with the conclusion

























_________________________________________________________________________________________________

O.A:D

Why choice C is not right?

whats the souce . the answer sounds dubious to me . veritas prep ?

mundasingh123 wrote:whats the souce . the answer sounds dubious to me . veritas prep ?

Yes, this is Critical Reasoning II for veritas prep.

yvonne0923 wrote:

mundasingh123 wrote:whats the souce . the answer sounds dubious to me . veritas prep ?

Yes, this is Critical Reasoning II for veritas prep.

Are you supposed to find all questions in CR 2 like this

I guess if someone can provide the complete URL to the solution, there is no harm. But mentioning just the site name is n't a good idea. It kills a lot of time and effort.

smackmartine wrote:I guess if someone can provide the complete URL to the solution, there is no harm. But mentioning just the site name is n't a good idea. It kills a lot of time and effort.

he is talking abt the book . It costs 22 $ go buy it if you wanna the oe

mundasingh123 wrote:

yvonne0923 wrote:

mundasingh123 wrote:whats the souce . the answer sounds dubious to me . veritas prep ?

Yes, this is Critical Reasoning II for veritas prep.

Are you supposed to find all questions in CR 2 like this

Yes, unlike other GMAT takers, I do have weaker reasoning skills and understanding of this language. In order to improve it, I have to deeply understand what the argument is and where my weakness is according to different problems. Even though there are explanations at the back of the book, the explanations may not cover my particular questions.

mundasingh123 wrote:

smackmartine wrote:I guess if someone can provide the complete URL to the solution, there is no harm. But mentioning just the site name is n't a good idea. It kills a lot of time and effort.

he is talking abt the book . It costs 22 $ go buy it if you wanna the oe

The OA seems to be expensive :). Better I will wait for an expert to comment.

smackmartine wrote:

mundasingh123 wrote:

smackmartine wrote:I guess if someone can provide the complete URL to the solution, there is no harm. But mentioning just the site name is n't a good idea. It kills a lot of time and effort.

he is talking abt the book . It costs 22 $ go buy it if you wanna the oe

The OA seems to be expensive . Better I will wait for an expert to comment.

One of the best responses i have seen on BTG

yvonne0923 wrote:

mundasingh123 wrote:

yvonne0923 wrote:

mundasingh123 wrote:whats the souce . the answer sounds dubious to me . veritas prep ?

Yes, this is Critical Reasoning II for veritas prep.

Are you supposed to find all questions in CR 2 like this

Yes, unlike other GMAT takers, I do have weaker reasoning skills and understanding of this language. In order to improve it, I have to deeply understand what the argument is and where my weakness is according to different problems. Even though there are explanations at the back of the book, the explanations may not cover my particular questions.

What i meant was are all the quests in CR 2 as tuf this one . CR 2 is supposed to be an advanced book for CR . CR 1 is the basic book

mundasingh123 wrote:

yvonne0923 wrote:

mundasingh123 wrote:

yvonne0923 wrote:

mundasingh123 wrote:whats the souce . the answer sounds dubious to me . veritas prep ?

Yes, this is Critical Reasoning II for veritas prep.

Are you supposed to find all questions in CR 2 like this

Yes, unlike other GMAT takers, I do have weaker reasoning skills and understanding of this language. In order to improve it, I have to deeply understand what the argument is and where my weakness is according to different problems. Even though there are explanations at the back of the book, the explanations may not cover my particular questions.

What i meant was are all the quests in CR 2 as tuf this one . CR 2 is supposed to be an advanced book for CR . CR 1 is the basic book

Sorry that I misunderstood your question. Not all the CR are like this, since these questions almost reach to the end of this book, so some of them may seem to be bit confusing.

This question actually explores the basic of Strengthening Question and also the fact that outside knowledge is detrimental to the success of CR.

The question stem says that the main conclusion is supported ONLY "by/through". How do you support the conclusion???.
By:
1. Validating the Assumption OR By Strengthening a Chain of Reasoning
2. Introducing a Principle to Strengthen The Argument.
3. Introducing a Situational Detail Parallel to the Chain of Reasoning and with good credentials such as "this data is from established sources).

Coming back to the question, mostly the first one is what one should start looking for and from the premise, this argument looks to be a fallacy where one should accept some opinion because the person giving an opinion has something large at stake.

So analyzing the argument:

Main Premise: X has his job at stake whereas Y doesnt.
Main Premise 2: So, we must believe what X says.
Conclusion: X says.

Assumption: If some person has something large at stake then one must believe him.

Now we must first try to validate this assumption. Answer Choice D is correct because it validates this assumption by saying that we must assess the relative reliability of the experts.

So the Main Conclusion is supported only if we VALIDATE THE ABOVE ASSUMPTION and this can be done by assessing their reliability.

Can the above assumption be validated by comparing the economic prospects of different things. No.
Hence, C is incorrect.

Hope this helps.

PS: Two more inputs for Strengthen Question.
1. Mental Arrangement of the Chain of Reasoning: One should be very good at this and can attain this after practice. Make a mental picture of Main Premise # and Conclusion and pre-phrase the assumption as shown above.
2. Impact reasoning: How will the answer choice impact the chain of reasoning or anything inside the chain of reasoning such as MP,C and Assumptions.

Also, remember the three ways in which argument can be strengthened. ASSUMPTION VALIDITY is the most common but the other two can occur too..

(C) seems correct, but it talks of Investment Companies not the economists working for them who risk their job. (D) says it is the "relative" reliability of the economists, which is the assumption.

The answer Choice is CORRECTLY (D).Let's deconstruct it

Author has already Reached the following conclusion:
Conclusion: Econmists(Inv companies)-RISK theier Job by announcements--SO More Reliable

(A)From the above CONCLUSION:--NUMBER doesn't MATTER
(B)There is no RISK discussed about the ACADEMIC Economists's opinions
(C)Economic prospects for the economy as a whole---BEYOND SCOPE
(D)RELATIVE RELIABILITY COMPARISON makes sense with the Conclusion
(E)IRRELEVANT