|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 23 Dec 2002
Posts: 13
Location: LA
Followers: 7
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
Digital clocks are preferable to analog clocks with dials [#permalink]
 04 Oct 2003, 18:07
Question Stats:
50% (02:23) correct
50% (01:17) wrong based on 0 sessions
Digital clocks are preferable to analog clocks with dials because they keep time more accurately, are much easier to read, and have no moving parts to wear out. They also enable children to grasp the concept of time, and to learn how to tell time more easily than they can with analog clocks.
All of the following assumptions underlie the conclusion of the passage above EXCEPT
a) The moving hands of analog clocks do not help children to understand the concept of time
b) Digital clocks are less expensive to produce and to buy than are analog clocks
c) Analog clocks cannot be made to tell time as accurately as digital clocks
d) Even those who learned how to tell time on analog clocks find digital clocks easier to read
e) Analog clocks have no esthetic advantages over digital clocks
The answer is B, but I don't get it. I chose E as I see nothing esthetic mentioned in the passage. Could anyone enlighten me?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 03 Feb 2003
Posts: 1683
Followers: 4
Kudos [?]:
16
[0], given: 0
|
If an option is a real assumption, its negation should destroy the argument.
B and E are confusing, I agree.
Let's consider negation of E: Analog clocks DO HAVE esthetic advantages over digital clocks. It is in the smallest degree possible that the negation of E destroys the assertion that digital clocks are much easier to read. With the lion's share of doubt, E can be considered an assumption. Negation of B does not harm the passage in any way. So, B is not an assumption.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 23 Dec 2002
Posts: 13
Location: LA
Followers: 7
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
Stolyar: thanks. But the way I see it...is that the passage metions that analog clcock wears out..so answer B actually underlies the passage..... doesn't it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
GMAT Instructor
Joined: 07 Jul 2003
Posts: 773
Location: New York NY 10024
Schools: Haas, MFE; Anderson, MBA; USC, MSEE
Followers: 5
Kudos [?]:
9
[0], given: 0
|
Re: Help me with this CR question [#permalink]
05 Oct 2003, 04:12
lakersgo wrote: Digital clocks are preferable to analog clocks with dials because they keep time more accurately, are much easier to read, and have no moving parts to wear out. They also enable children to grasp the concept of time, and to learn how to tell time more easily than they can with analog clocks.
All of the following assumptions underlie the conclusion of the passage above EXCEPT
a) The moving hands of analog clocks do not help children to understand the concept of time
b) Digital clocks are less expensive to produce and to buy than are analog clocks
c) Analog clocks cannot be made to tell time as accurately as digital clocks
d) Even those who learned how to tell time on analog clocks find digital clocks easier to read
e) Analog clocks have no esthetic advantages over digital clocks
The answer is B, but I don't get it. I chose E as I see nothing esthetic mentioned in the passage. Could anyone enlighten me?
The conclusion is the digital clocks are preferable to analog because of (lots of stuff). Omitted is any mention of the aesthetics of the clock. If analog clocks were more esthetic than digital, it is possible that that alone might make them preferable to digital clock.
_________________
Best,
AkamaiBrah
Former Senior Instructor, Manhattan GMAT and VeritasPrep
Vice President, Midtown NYC Investment Bank, Structured Finance IT
MFE, Haas School of Business, UC Berkeley, Class of 2005
MBA, Anderson School of Management, UCLA, Class of 1993
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 12 Sep 2003
Posts: 37
Location: Peru
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
Re: Help me with this CR question [#permalink]
05 Oct 2003, 16:56
[quote="AkamaiBrah"][quote="lakersgo"]Digital clocks are preferable to analog clocks with dials because they keep time more accurately, are much easier to read, and have no moving parts to wear out. They also enable children to grasp the concept of time, and to learn how to tell time more easily than they can with analog clocks.
All of the following assumptions underlie the conclusion of the passage above EXCEPT
a) The moving hands of analog clocks do not help children to understand the concept of time
b) Digital clocks are less expensive to produce and to buy than are analog clocks
c) Analog clocks cannot be made to tell time as accurately as digital clocks
d) Even those who learned how to tell time on analog clocks find digital clocks easier to read
e) Analog clocks have no esthetic advantages over digital clocks
The answer is B, but I don't get it. I chose E as I see nothing esthetic mentioned in the passage. Could anyone enlighten me?[/quote]
The conclusion is the digital clocks are preferable to analog because of (lots of stuff). Omitted is any mention of the aesthetics of the clock. If analog clocks were more esthetic than digital, it is possible that that alone might make them preferable to digital clock.[/quote]
Durability is not the same as cost, I vote for B.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Help me with this CR question
[#permalink]
05 Oct 2003, 16:56
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
