BUILDING RESTORATION (PLS EXPLAIN WHY A IS WRONG IN DETAIL)

Expert replies

max37274: Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts; Posts: 93; Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:03 amFollowed by: 1 member; Thanked: 2 times

by max37274 » Sun Feb 21, 2010 5:22 am

Concerned citizen: The mayor, an outspoken critic of the proposed restoration of city hall, is right when he notes that the building is outdated, but that the restoration would be expensive at a time when the budget is already tight. We cannot afford such a luxury item in this time of financial restraint, he says. However, I respectfully disagree. The building provides the last remaining link to the days of the city's founding, and preserving a sense of municipal history is crucial to maintaining respect for our city government and its authority. So to the question,"Can we really afford to?" I can only respond, "Can we afford not to?"

Which one of the following most accurately characterizes a flaw in the concerned citizen's argument?

a. the argument is solely an emotional appeal to history
b. the argument ambiguously uses the word "afford"
c. the argument inappropriately appeals to the authority of the mayor
d. the argument incorrectly presumes that the restoration would be expensive
e. the argument inappropriately relies on the emotional connotations of words such as "outdated" and "luxury"

Like this post

Source: Beat The GMAT — Critical Reasoning | Sun Feb 21, 2010 5:22 am

harsh.champ: Legendary Member; Posts: 1132; Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2009 3:38 amFollowed by: 6 members; Location: India; Thanked: 64 times; GMAT Score:760

by harsh.champ » Sun Feb 21, 2010 5:34 am

max37274 wrote:Concerned citizen: The mayor, an outspoken critic of the proposed restoration of city hall, is right when he notes that the building is outdated, but that the restoration would be expensive at a time when the budget is already tight. We cannot afford such a luxury item in this time of financial restraint, he says. However, I respectfully disagree. The building provides the last remaining link to the days of the city's founding, and preserving a sense of municipal history is crucial to maintaining respect for our city government and its authority. So to the question,"Can we really afford to?" I can only respond, "Can we afford not to?"

Which one of the following most accurately characterizes a flaw in the concerned citizen's argument?

a. the argument is solely an emotional appeal to history
b. the argument ambiguously uses the word "afford"
c. the argument inappropriately appeals to the authority of the mayor
d. the argument incorrectly presumes that the restoration would be expensive
e. the argument inappropriately relies on the emotional connotations of words such as "outdated" and "luxury"

IMO E is the answer.
Surely,in A "emotional approach to history" is written but E most accurately characterizes it.
Both A and E are right but E is more accurate than A.

What's the OA??

It takes time and effort to explain, so if my comment helped you please press Thanks button

Just because something is hard doesn't mean you shouldn't try,it means you should just try harder.

"Keep Walking" - Johnny Walker

Like this post

max37274: Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts; Posts: 93; Joined: Thu Oct 22, 2009 4:03 amFollowed by: 1 member; Thanked: 2 times

by max37274 » Sun Feb 21, 2010 5:39 am

oa is B

Like this post

harsh.champ: Legendary Member; Posts: 1132; Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2009 3:38 amFollowed by: 6 members; Location: India; Thanked: 64 times; GMAT Score:760

by harsh.champ » Sun Feb 21, 2010 5:43 am

max37274 wrote:oa is B

Well in that case,even I am confused How can use of "afford" change the answer??
IMO E should be the answer even now.

What is the source of this question??
Does not it contain the solution??
I am looking forward to the solution.

It takes time and effort to explain, so if my comment helped you please press Thanks button

Just because something is hard doesn't mean you shouldn't try,it means you should just try harder.

"Keep Walking" - Johnny Walker

Like this post

firdaus117: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 102; Joined: Sat Feb 20, 2010 5:38 am; Location: IIM Ahmedabad; Thanked: 10 times

by firdaus117 » Sun Feb 21, 2010 5:51 am

Well I go for E which correctly exposes the flaw in the citizen's argument.He contradicts Mayor's conclusion of high expediture without giving out a financial assessment to counter latter's claim.He ,on the other hand,relies on the emotional connotations of words.
Between A & E,the latter one is more detailed and spot on.

Like this post

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

by gmatmachoman » Sun Feb 21, 2010 6:29 am

max37274 wrote:Concerned citizen: The mayor, an outspoken critic of the proposed restoration of city hall, is right when he notes that the building is outdated, but that the restoration would be expensive at a time when the budget is already tight. We cannot afford such a luxury item in this time of financial restraint, he says.

However, I respectfully disagree. The building provides the last remaining link to the days of the city's founding, and preserving a sense of municipal history is crucial to maintaining respect for our city government and its authority. So to the question,"Can we really afford to?" I can only respond, "Can we afford not to?"

Which one of the following most accurately characterizes a flaw in the concerned citizen's argument?

a. the argument is solely an emotional appeal to history
b. the argument ambiguously uses the word "afford"
c. the argument inappropriately appeals to the authority of the mayor
d. the argument incorrectly presumes that the restoration would be expensive
e. the argument inappropriately relies on the emotional connotations of words such as "outdated" and "luxury"

Max, Let me try my best...( I am not sure though becox this kind of patterns NEVER appears in Real GMAT)

For ur "happiness" I am lending my hand!!!

Here there are 2 characters : one is concerned citizen & the other is the author ( Marked as "I")

Now the question stems says a flaw in the concerned citizen's argument..

Since there is no conclusion in the argument and just they are claims made my 2 people, its natural we can see discrepancies/ ambiguity/ biasness in statements.

Here " affordability" is term used to create " conflict of thought" to generate " ambiguity".

CC (concerened citizen) says Mayor has to concentrate on " basic social activities rather than " restoration activities which is assumed to be " luxurious"

Author counters it as preserving a sense of municipal history is critical for Govt officials.

CC acknowledges " affordability" in terms of " financial capabilty( more of economic sense)...

Author speaks " affordabilty"in terms of " maintaining prestige/ old history sense"

SO B fits the bill.

Ur question ??

Why A is wrong???

A talks about emotional appeal ...Right??

But CC is more concerened about finiacial restraints/ commitments of mayor towards the state. No emotions is in play.Its pure economics.

E is certainly wrong becoz, while solving a flaw based question we need to identify /pick answers that relates to both sides of the speakers.

R&D on GMAT algorithm:

https://www.beatthegmat.com/r-d-on-gmat- ... tml#305739

Like this post

komal: Legendary Member; Posts: 777; Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:02 amFollowed by: 47 members; Location: Mumbai, India; Thanked: 117 times

by komal » Sun Feb 21, 2010 6:43 am

max37274 wrote:Concerned citizen: The mayor, an outspoken critic of the proposed restoration of city hall, is right when he notes that the building is outdated, but that the restoration would be expensive at a time when the budget is already tight. We cannot afford such a luxury item in this time of financial restraint, he says. However, I respectfully disagree. The building provides the last remaining link to the days of the city's founding, and preserving a sense of municipal history is crucial to maintaining respect for our city government and its authority. So to the question,"Can we really afford to?" I can only respond, "Can we afford not to?"

Which one of the following most accurately characterizes a flaw in the concerned citizen's argument?

a. the argument is solely an emotional appeal to history
Incorrect : This is an attractive answer choice.... but the word 'solely' is way too extreme for my liking.

b. the argument ambiguously uses the word "afford"
Correct : The word 'afford' is open to two interpretations here. Mayor's interpretation of the word afford = finance & the citizen's interpretation of the word afford = preserving a sense of municipal history.

c. the argument inappropriately appeals to the authority of the mayor
Incorrect : Nothing in the passage suggests appeals to the authority of the mayor.

d. the argument incorrectly presumes that the restoration would be expensive
Incorrect : It is anything but presumption. Eliminated.

e. the argument inappropriately relies on the emotional connotations of words such as "outdated" and "luxury"
Incorrect : This statement does not correctly characterizes a flaw in the concerned citizen's argument

https://www.e-gmat.com/

Like this post

chaya009: Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts; Posts: 59; Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 10:11 pm; Location: United States; Thanked: 4 times

by chaya009 » Sun Feb 21, 2010 3:42 pm

I chose A and now i see where i went wrong, thanks for the explanation gmatmachoman.

Like this post

joseph32: Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts; Posts: 303; Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 10:23 am

by joseph32 » Mon May 16, 2016 12:00 am

I believe the correct answer should be B

Like this post

Post new topic Post Reply

• Page 1 of 1

GMAT Course Reviews

559 reviews

1168 reviews

431 reviews

359 reviews

147 reviews

5/5

5 Star (560 Reviews)

"Target Test Prep is the closest to the official version of the GMAT exam, about 99% accuracy in terms of the quality and quantity of information. The course has excellently created singular sets of focused lessons and tests for every possible topic that one could come across in the official GMAT exam."

"The TTP course maximizes the efficiency of the time you spend studying. It will take time and effort but I could almost guarantee that if you complete the course exactly as it is laid out you will get an amazing score. They also have a very responsive team willing to help with any questions you might have."

"TTP has two things that I think no other test prep company offers: A teaching approach that reinforces understanding and an attitude that will give you the mental preparedness needed to succeed on the test. TTP gives you a deep understanding of the concept you need to know while teaching you how to think."

Write a Review