BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

OG10 - CR

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2008 4:04 pm
Thanked: 3 times
Followed by:2 members

OG10 - CR

by venmic » Sat Sep 17, 2011 8:05 am
When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf and are then asked whether they can hear the
hypnotist, they reply, "No." Some theorists try to explain this result by arguing that the selves of hypnotized
subjects are dissociated into separate parts, and that the part that is deaf is dissociated from the part that
replies.
Which of the following challenges indicates the most serious weakness in the attempted explanation
described above?
(A) Why does the part that replies not answer, "Yes"?
(B) Why are the observed facts in need of any special explanation?
(C) Why do the subjects appear to accept the hypnotist's suggestion that they are deaf?
(D) Why do hypnotized subjects all respond the same way in the situation described?
(E) Why are the separate parts of the self the same for all subjects?


Ive got the answer right by eliminating the wrong ones
Just want to undertand how it works on each of the answer choices- analysis that is

Thanks

A
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 582
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 12:48 am
Thanked: 61 times
Followed by:6 members
GMAT Score:740

by force5 » Sat Sep 17, 2011 9:00 am
hi ven

A is the best...

if the subject is answering the question then he must be using the hearing part of the brain. because if he was using the deaf part he wouldn't have answered at all... right!!.... but if they were using the hearing part he could have answered a "yes"... hence A weakens the explanation the most.
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 540
Joined: Sat Dec 20, 2008 7:24 pm
Thanked: 37 times
Followed by:6 members

by navami » Sun Sep 25, 2011 7:55 am
IMO A
This time no looking back!!!
Navami
Top
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun Jul 18, 2010 3:09 pm

by Bigred2008 » Wed Sep 28, 2011 6:44 pm
venmic wrote:When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf and are then asked whether they can hear the
hypnotist, they reply, "No." Some theorists try to explain this result by arguing that the selves of hypnotized
subjects are dissociated into separate parts, and that the part that is deaf is dissociated from the part that
replies.
Which of the following challenges indicates the most serious weakness in the attempted explanation
described above?
(A) Why does the part that replies not answer, "Yes"?
(B) Why are the observed facts in need of any special explanation?
(C) Why do the subjects appear to accept the hypnotist's suggestion that they are deaf?
(D) Why do hypnotized subjects all respond the same way in the situation described?
(E) Why are the separate parts of the self the same for all subjects?


Ive got the answer right by eliminating the wrong ones
Just want to undertand how it works on each of the answer choices- analysis that is

Thanks

A
If you think of what the argument states; " the part that is deaf is dissociated from the part that
replies." if it a person was in a dissociated state and the deaf part was really separate from the part that replies it should answer Yes it can hear rather than NO. The deaf state should have no bearing on the answer the other state gives. Hope this helps.
"No Pressure, No Diamonds. "
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1