Cafeteria patron: The apples sold in this cafeteria are : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) - Page 2
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 22 Jan 2017, 05:27

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Cafeteria patron: The apples sold in this cafeteria are

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Director
Joined: 26 Mar 2006
Posts: 647
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

13 Sep 2006, 23:47
sangarelli wrote:
Guyz the OA is (A).

Sangarelli

It will be of great help if you can post the OE for this CR

Thank you so much
Senior Manager
Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 330
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2006, 00:37
Guyz fnd this in the archives.

soln given by vithal.
The conclusion of the argument is "the cafeteria is selling pesticide-covered fruit, thereby endangering its patrons" an assumption is that which fills the gap between evidence and conclusion

Evidence is: Apples are sprayed with pesticide - and cafeteria does not wash them

The Gap: Apples could be washed anywhere in between the farm and the cafeteria

A fills this gap and hence is the assumption - B is an additional evidence to reach the conclusion

soln given by wilfred
Cafeteria patron:
1) The apples sold in this cafeteria are greasy.
2) The cashier told me that the apples are in that condition when they are delivered to the cafeteria and that the cafeteria does not wash the apples it sells.
3) Most fruit is sprayed with dangerous pesticides before it is harvested, and is dangerous until it is washed.
4) Clearly, the cafeteria is selling pesticide-covered fruit, thereby endangering its patrons. <-- conclusion

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
The assumption should hold up the conclusion. That's the only job of an assumption.

(A) The apples that the cafeteria sells are not thoroughly washed after harvest but before reaching the cafeteria.
- This should be the answer. If the apples were not thoroughly washed before reaching the cafeteria, then it is indeed through that the cafeteria is selling pesticide covered fruits.

(B) Most pesticides that are sprayed on fruit before harvest leave a greasy residue on the fruit.
- Wrong. It focuses on the first premise, and forgets about looking for an evidence that holds up the conclusion.

(C) Many of the cafeteriaâ€™s patrons are unaware that the cafeteria does not wash the apples it sells.
- Not important here.

(D) Only pesticides that leave a greasy residue on fruit can be washed off.
- Out of scope
_________________

A well-balanced person is one who has a drink in each of his hands.

Director
Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 580
Location: France
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 99 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2006, 01:18
Quote:
(A) The apples that the cafeteria sells are not thoroughly washed after harvest but before reaching the cafeteria.
- This should be the answer. If the apples were not thoroughly washed before reaching the cafeteria, then it is indeed through that the cafeteria is selling pesticide covered fruits.

The patron doesn't say how much the apples have to be washed so as them not to be covered by pesticides. May be it is enough to wash them with a little spray of water or may be they have to be immerged for one night in 90Â°C water. He just says they have to be washed. A says they are washed(but not thoroughly before cafeteria)

So I have some difficulties to understand, how the patron, with this assumption, can still say that the apples are not washed and says they are covered with pesticides.

If the argument were : The apples are not washed. Apples have pesticides. They are covered and dangerous until THOROUGHLY washed===> You sell apples covered with pesticides and dangerous.

In this case A wd be clearly an assumption.

Am I wrong or do you find also this CR presents some weaknesses?
Senior Manager
Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 330
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2006, 01:44
Well i do think the answer choice (A) is not worded clearly.
_________________

A well-balanced person is one who has a drink in each of his hands.

Manager
Joined: 27 Jan 2006
Posts: 156
Location: Europe
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2006, 11:08
not that well-structured Q. I think..

In the Q,
"The cashier told me that the apples are in that condition when they are delivered to the cafeteria and that the cafeteria does not wash the apples it sells."

In B)Most pesticides that are sprayed on fruit before harvest leave a greasy residue on the fruit.

I think it's just repeating.
_________________

Stay hungry, Stay foolish

Director
Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 755
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2006, 12:37
yes, chose A as well. Negate A, and the argument drops dead.

what is the conclusion: that the cafetaria sells pesticide covered fruit.

what do we know: washing fruits kills the pesticide.

what does the negation of A say: fruit is washed before it comes to the cafe. this means that the fruit is not dangerous, even though it may be greasy.
Director
Joined: 26 Mar 2006
Posts: 647
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2006, 17:10

On Negating - why would any one try to negate an assumption. To be on the common note for me negating is cancelling or reversing. Negating should be associated with evidence or supporting statements and not with assumptions

Assumption is hypothesis or guess or belief or an idea based on circumstances and facts held by the patron (in this case)

The Patron alarms every one that the apples are dangerous.

Why it is dangerous - because it still contains pesticides
Why there are still pesticides - Pesticides may or may not be there. But the patron assumes it as cashier denies washing the apples

How does statement 'A' support here
It is an evidence that the apples are washed just before reaching the cashier and which unfortunately not known to the patron (forget assumption)
If the patron assumes that apples are washed just before reaching the shop why would he ask the cashier again why they didn't do the washing.
Also why would he jump to conclusion that the residue on the apples are pesticides and not due to other means during transportation.

In fact no where it states or there is evidence that the residue left on the apples is pesticide but the patron relates it somehow (he had his own hypothesis...which is assumption)
Director
Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 755
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2006, 17:59
negating an assumption means testing to see how it affects the argument if it is not true.

By definition:

An assumption is a statement that, if false, causes the argument to fallacious, or invalid.

as an example, consider the following argument:-

Beyond700 will score an 840 on the GMAT. This is because he/she is smart, can destroy GMAT questions in no time, and is committed.

Which of the following is an assumption?

A. Beyond700 plays golf pretty well.
B. A score higher than or equal to 840 is possible on the GMAT
C. 80% or more test takers score under 840 on the GMAT
D. 840 is a very good score, and Beyond700 is a very good student
E. Beyond700 is good at post-doctorate level math

A pretty bad example, but you get the drift. If A is false, the argument cannot hold. See what I mean?

Last edited by Futuristic on 14 Sep 2006, 20:38, edited 1 time in total.
Director
Joined: 26 Mar 2006
Posts: 647
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2006, 18:31
Futuristic wrote:
negating an assumption means testing to see how it affects the argument if it is not true.

By definition:

An assumption is a statement that, if false, causes the argument to fallacious, or invalid.

as an example, consider the following argument:-

Beyond700 will score an 840 on the GMAT. This is because he/she is smart, can destroy GMAT questions in no time, and is committed.

Which of the following is an assumption?

A. Beyond700 plays golf pretty well.
B. A score higher than or equal to 840 is possible on the GMAT
C. 80% or more test takers score under 840 on the GMAT
D. 840 is a very good score, and Beyond700 is a very good student
E. Beyond700 is good at post-doctorate level math

A pretty bad example, but you get the drift. If B is false, the argument cannot hold. See what I mean?

Futuristic

Appreciate your efforts to brighten my thought process.

Agree with your explanation for Assumption. But I feel that is quite generic and at a very high level.

Your example is also quite good, really impressive and agreeable. Not many would be able to do that.

Coming back to this argument - Sadly I still cannot take it.

What does the following statement from the argument mean?

Most fruit is sprayed with dangerous pesticides before it is harvested, and is dangerous until it is washed. Clearly, the cafeteria is selling pesticide-covered fruit, thereby endangering its patrons.
Manager
Joined: 15 Aug 2006
Posts: 97
Followers: 1

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

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2006, 18:54
A it is.

Greasy has nothing to do with the argument, patron's argument is primarily around apples not been washed by cafeteria and patron is interpreting that to apples never been washed and thus they are dangerous.

So if you negate A - that means apples were washed before reaching cafeteria and thus they are not dangerous.
_________________

http://gmatstuff.blogspot.com

Director
Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 755
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2006, 20:44
Beyond700:

Premise: Most fruit is sprayed with dangerous pesticides before it is harvested, and is dangerous until it is washed

Conclusion: Clearly, the cafeteria is selling pesticide-covered fruit, thereby endangering its patrons

A premise is always true. A conclusion may or may not be true based on the premise. What does the conclusion say? That the cafe is endangering its patrons. Why so? Because the fruits it sells are covered with pesticide.

Now negate A. Negation of A means that the fruit ARE washed before they reach the cafe, which in turn implies that the fruit is not pesticide covered. If the fruit are not covered with pesticide then the cafe is not selling pesticide covered fruit. This means that the cafe is NOT endangering its patrons.

Therefore A MUST be true for the cafe to be selling pesticide covered fruit and harming the patrons.
A little clearer?
Director
Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 580
Location: France
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 99 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2006, 21:36
Futuristic
Quote:
Now negate A. Negation of A means that the fruit ARE washed before they reach the cafe

I've tried several times to explain my point of view before, but what seems obvious to you, isnt to me. So futuristic, may be you could help me.

(A) The apples that the cafeteria sells are not thoroughly washed after harvest but before reaching the cafeteria.

If I understand this sentence, it says that the apples are washed, or dont I understand it? So no need to negate it?

Last edited by karlfurt on 14 Sep 2006, 23:15, edited 1 time in total.
Director
Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 755
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2006, 21:51
karlfurt wrote:
Futuristic
Quote:
Now negate A. Negation of A means that the fruit ARE washed before they reach the cafe

I've tried several times to explain my point of you before, but what seems obvious to you, isnt to me. So futuristic, may be you could help me.

(A) The apples that the cafeteria sells are not thoroughly washed after harvest but before reaching the cafeteria.

Sorry, I did not see you post anything to me. May have missed it.

If I understand this sentence, it says that the apples are washed, or dont I understand it? So no need to negate it?

You don't understand it. A is an assumption that states that the apples are not washed before they come to the cafetaria.

In finding the assumption type questions, you should always assume the statement is false. Let me know what part of my earlier post is not clear, and I will try again.

Last edited by Futuristic on 14 Sep 2006, 21:52, edited 1 time in total.
Director
Joined: 26 Mar 2006
Posts: 647
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2006, 21:51
karlfurt wrote:
Futuristic
Quote:
Now negate A. Negation of A means that the fruit ARE washed before they reach the cafe

I've tried several times to explain my point of you before, but what seems obvious to you, isnt to me. So futuristic, may be you could help me.

(A) The apples that the cafeteria sells are not thoroughly washed after harvest but before reaching the cafeteria.

If I understand this sentence, it says that the apples are washed, or dont I understand it? So no need to negate it?

Futuristic

Agree with your logical evaluation of the argument. But please consider the point raised above by Karlfurt

Statement (A) clearly says that the apples are washed just before they are delivered and not immediately after harvest.

For me the above is a fact or an additional information provided and it is not an assumption.

If you negate statement (a) it can be either of the 2 two
(1) No wash after harvest and before delivery
(2) Wash after harvest and no wash before delivery...
Director
Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 755
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2006, 21:53
ok i see the confusion now.....will post my reply in a bit....difficult typing with an arm in a sling.
Director
Joined: 28 Dec 2005
Posts: 755
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2006, 21:58
A) The apples that the cafeteria sells are not thoroughly washed after harvest but before reaching the cafeteria.

can be interpreted in 2 ways.....however i think you guys are interpreting it in a way which is grammatically incorrect

Interpretation 1: The apples that reach the cafe are not washed anytime between the time they are harvested and the time they reach the cafe. This is my interpretation.

Interpretation 2: The apples that reach the cafe are not washed after harvest, but they are washed before reaching the cafe. This seems to be the interpretation some of you have. The sentence would be grammatically incorrect if this was the meaning....

The correct sentence would be:

The apples that the cafeteria sells are not thoroughly washed after harvest but are washed before reaching the cafeteria.

Are we on the same page now?
Intern
Joined: 27 Aug 2006
Posts: 10
Location: CA
Followers: 0

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

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2006, 22:47
I will go with A.

A = The apples that the cafeteria sells are not thoroughly washed after harvest but before reaching the cafeteria.

Neg A implies removing the not there.

Neg A = The apples that the cafeteria sells are thoroughly washed after harvest but before reaching the cafeteria.

If Neg A, then apples are not dangerous, and cafeteria won't be endangering its patrons
Director
Joined: 26 Mar 2006
Posts: 647
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2006, 23:23
Futuristic wrote:
A) The apples that the cafeteria sells are not thoroughly washed after harvest but before reaching the cafeteria.

can be interpreted in 2 ways.....however i think you guys are interpreting it in a way which is grammatically incorrect

Interpretation 1: The apples that reach the cafe are not washed anytime between the time they are harvested and the time they reach the cafe. This is my interpretation.

Interpretation 2: The apples that reach the cafe are not washed after harvest, but they are washed before reaching the cafe. This seems to be the interpretation some of you have. The sentence would be grammatically incorrect if this was the meaning....

The correct sentence would be:

The apples that the cafeteria sells are not thoroughly washed after harvest but are washed before reaching the cafeteria.

Are we on the same page now?

Thank you Futuristic. Now we know the root cause it is basic interpretation.

Neverthless, it is hard to believe that when but has the following meaning
- other than, except, excluding , otherwise

How can it be interpretted as you have done it.

Kindly replace but with these words and read the sentence once again.
Director
Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 580
Location: France
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 99 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

15 Sep 2006, 02:21
Beyond700 wrote:
karlfurt wrote:
Futuristic
Quote:
Now negate A. Negation of A means that the fruit ARE washed before they reach the cafe

I've tried several times to explain my point of view before, but what seems obvious to you, isnt to me. So futuristic, may be you could help me.

(A) The apples that the cafeteria sells are not thoroughly washed after harvest but before reaching the cafeteria.

If I understand this sentence, it says that the apples are washed, or dont I understand it? So no need to negate it?

Futuristic

Agree with your logical evaluation of the argument. But please consider the point raised above by Karlfurt

Statement (A) clearly says that the apples are washed just before they are delivered and not immediately after harvest.

For me the above is a fact or an additional information provided and it is not an assumption.

If you negate statement (a) it can be either of the 2 two
(1) No wash after harvest and before delivery
(2) Wash after harvest and no wash before delivery...

Waouh!!
Finally someone understood me! Congratulation Beyond700!
That was exactly the point I raised since the beginning of this RC, but noone has reacted.

Thanks, also to futuristic.

So the sentence becomes :"The apples that the cafeteria sells are not thoroughly washed after harvest but are not thorougly washed before reaching the cafeteria.

It seems totally weird!

It wouldnt be better so?:
The apples that the cafeteria sells are neither thoroughly washed after harvest NOR (they are)before reaching the cafeteria.
15 Sep 2006, 02:21

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 39 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 The apples sold in this cafeteria are greasy 5 14 Oct 2015, 03:16
9 The cafeteria of a certain elementary school provides a free lunch 12 12 Aug 2015, 15:16
3 A survey of food preferences by the school cafeteria showed 11 03 Nov 2009, 19:34
A survey of food preferences by the school cafeteria showed 3 23 Jun 2008, 20:46
A survey of food preferences by the school cafeteria showed 5 30 Jun 2007, 11:34
Display posts from previous: Sort by