Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 23 Oct 2014, 14:06

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

According to the school's principal, no teacher who refuses

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 05 May 2005
Posts: 67
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 0

According to the school's principal, no teacher who refuses [#permalink] New post 30 Jul 2005, 02:10
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
According to the school's principal, no teacher who refuses to participate in the afternoon con­ference was allowed to attend the buffet dinner immediately after the conference. Sanjay, who is one of the school's teachers, is not the sort of per­son to refuse a buffet dinner; yet I'm certain Sanjay was not at the dinner. I can only conclude that Sanjay refused to participate in the conference.
Which of the following demonstrates a pattern of reasoning most like the flawed reasoning in the argument above?
(A) All attentive students are rewarded with high grades in school. Alan is not attentive as a student. Therefore, he will not be rewarded with high grades in school.
(B) Every person seated in the front row can hear the coach's instructions to his players. Ursula can hear the coach's instructions. Therefore, Ursula must be seated in the front row.
(C) Anyone who claims to have been abducted by aliens is either not being truthful or is mistaken about whether he or she has been abducted by aliens. Sandy is always truth­ful. Therefore, she has not been abducted by aliens.
(D) Every legislator is in favor of the bill. Martha is not in favor of the bill. Therefore, she must not be a legislator.
(E) This sculpture is either priceless or a worth­less fake. This sculpture is not a worthless fake. Therefore, it is priceless.

OA some posts below

Source - lectures by MBAConsult

Last edited by Pauline on 06 Aug 2005, 04:54, edited 1 time in total.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Nov 2004
Posts: 486
Location: Chicago
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 30 Jul 2005, 11:31
Will go with D on this one..

The argument clains the following

Conference then buffet
No buffet then no concerence

In the same line

legislater then support bill
no bill support then no legislator

I could be wrong....
_________________

Fear Mediocrity, Respect Ignorance

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 561
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 30 Jul 2005, 12:48
(C) for me on this one. Everyother option can be eliminated except (C), which closely follows the pattern of the stem.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 28 Jan 2004
Posts: 207
Location: Ghana
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 01 Aug 2005, 09:30
D looks like it for me.
_________________

It's not over until it's OVER!

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Jul 2005
Posts: 65
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 01 Aug 2005, 10:03
B for me
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 04 May 2005
Posts: 284
Location: CA, USA
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 01 Aug 2005, 10:56
B

The original logic goes this way:
if X then probably Y, but if not X then surely not Y (or if Y then surely X)

(A) All attentive students are rewarded with high grades in school. Alan is not attentive as a student. Therefore, he will not be rewarded with high grades in school.

almost correct, except, we have Y (being attentive student) X (students are rewarded with high grades) and Z (will be rewarded with high grades, which is in the future)

(B) Every person seated in the front row can hear the coach's instructions to his players. Ursula can hear the coach's instructions. Therefore, Ursula must be seated in the front row.

Y(seated in the front) X (can heard coach)
Ursula can hear coach (X) does not necessarily require that she being
seated in the front (Y)


(C) Anyone who claims to have been abducted by aliens is either not being truthful or is mistaken about whether he or she has been abducted by aliens. Sandy is always truth­ful. Therefore, she has not been abducted by aliens.

(claim been abducted) Y (not being truthful) X (being mistaken) Z
not the same structure as stem

(D) Every legislator is in favor of the bill. Martha is not in favor of the bill. Therefore, she must not be a legislator.

This is not a flawed reasoning.

(E) This sculpture is either priceless or a worth­less fake. This sculpture is not a worthless fake. Therefore, it is priceless.

This is not a flawed reasoning. Not similiar logic stucture as stem either.
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 561
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 01 Aug 2005, 17:46
OA ps.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 05 May 2005
Posts: 67
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 01 Aug 2005, 23:24
OA is B.

gpoo is a winner!

Official explanation:
The correct answer is (B).
The original argument boils down to the following: Premise: If a teacher refuses to attend the confer­ence, then the teacher will not attend the buffet. Premise: Sanjay did not attend the buffet. Conclusion: Sanjay refused to attend the confer­ence.
To reveal the argument's structure (and its flawed rea­soning), express the argument using symbols: Premise: If A, then B. Premise: X is B. Conclusion: X is A.
This reasoning is fallacious, and choice (B) demon­strates the same basic pattern:
Premise: If a person is seated in the front row, then the person can hear the coach. (If A, then B.)
Premise: Ursula can hear the coach. (X is B.) Conclusion: Ursula is seated in the front row. (X is A.)
  [#permalink] 01 Aug 2005, 23:24
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
2 Experts publish their posts in the topic The principal at Ames Middle School hired a new math teacher Gian 7 30 Jun 2013, 04:33
Experts publish their posts in the topic According to the new school district policy, only teachers voodoochild 7 07 Sep 2012, 19:29
3 Experts publish their posts in the topic The school principal noboru 25 22 Oct 2010, 09:13
School children who are punished by their teachers for not stolyar 11 01 Oct 2007, 05:04
The school principal insisted that student failures are chiragr 8 01 May 2006, 09:21
Display posts from previous: Sort by

According to the school's principal, no teacher who refuses

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.