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

It is currently 21 Oct 2014, 04:10

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

Few businesses will voluntarily implement environmental

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Current Student
avatar
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 3403
Location: New York City
Schools: Wharton'11 HBS'12
Followers: 13

Kudos [?]: 164 [0], given: 2

Few businesses will voluntarily implement environmental [#permalink] New post 23 Jul 2005, 17:37
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 1 sessions
Few businesses will voluntarily implement environmental protection measures that benefit the public if those measures reduce profitability. Even though such measures may cost less to implement than the total value of their benefits to society, the company making the decision bears all of the cost and receives little, if any, of the benefit. For example, XYZ Corporation has for the last 10 years refused to install smokestack filters to reduce the air pollution emitted by its factory, claiming that the cost would be prohibitive. Therefore, if such measures are to be implemented to protect the environment, they must be initiated by government regulation or intervention.

The bolded portions of the argument above perform which of the following functions?

The first phrase states the conclusion, and the second provides evidence, the truth of which supports the validity of the conclusion

The first phrase states a premise supporting the conclusion, and the second provides evidence, the falsity of which would disprove the first phrase.

The first phrase describes a general principle, and the second provides evidence countering that principle

The first phrase states a claim supporting the conclusion, but for which no evidence is given, and the second describes an example supporting the conclusion.

The first phrase states a generalization supporting the conclusion, and the second cites an example supporting that generalization
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 30 May 2005
Posts: 374
Followers: 1

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

 [#permalink] New post 24 Jul 2005, 14:16
My answer is B. The first BF is the main premise that is necessary for the conclusion that the govt needs to fund environmental measures and the second BF is the example of the premise that companies do not undertake enviro measures if it affects profitability.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Jun 2005
Posts: 403
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 24 Jul 2005, 14:26
AJB77
B is a good choice.
But I would go for E, only because I don't know the meaning of the word "countering" in (C):)
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Posts: 908
Followers: 1

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

 [#permalink] New post 24 Jul 2005, 16:27
E it is.

First boldface is a generalization (hint: few businesses) about the reluctance to implement protection measures that benefit the public if those measures reduce profitability.

The conclusion here is that “if such measures are to be implemented to protect the environment, they must be initiated by government regulation or interventionâ€
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 20 Oct 2005
Posts: 10
Followers: 0

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

 [#permalink] New post 27 Oct 2005, 02:06
Here Conclusion is:Government shoud take intiative few businesses would take such steps.

Evidence: XYZ.....

We can clearly remove A,C, D


Incorrect The first phrase states the conclusion(this is not the conclusion), and the second provides evidence, the truth of which supports the validity of the conclusion

The first phrase states a premise supporting the conclusion, and the second provides evidence, the falsity of which would disprove the first phrase. (lets keep this)

IncorrectThe first phrase describes a general principle, and the second provides evidence countering that principle (no countering between the BFs)

IncorrectThe first phrase states a claim supporting the conclusion, but for which no evidence is given(some evidence is given for the conclusion), and the second describes an example supporting the conclusion.

The first phrase states a generalization supporting the conclusion, and the second cites an example supporting that generalization(lets keep this)

We are left with B & E.

In B the falsity of the 2nd BF would not disprove teh 1st BF and hence we can remove B.

Thus it should be E[/quote]
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 14 Sep 2005
Posts: 996
Location: South Korea
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 27 Oct 2005, 04:25
[quote="Folaa3"]E it is.

First boldface is a generalization (hint: few businesses) about the reluctance to implement protection measures that benefit the public if those measures reduce profitability.

The conclusion here is that “if such measures are to be implemented to protect the environment, they must be initiated by government regulation or interventionâ€
_________________

Auge um Auge, Zahn um Zahn :twisted: !

SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 1743
Location: Dhaka
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 27 Oct 2005, 04:55
Here the conclusion is
if such measures are to be implemented to protect the environment, they must be initiated by government regulation or intervention.

So A is out
B is out because if the second BF is false, first bf will not be incorrect. the key word here is few business will voluntarily...... so if XYZ does not implment...still there can be som other companies that will implement.

C is out becasue the second phrase doesnot disagree with the first one.

I am left with D and E now.

Now the second phrase cites the example to support the conclusion, not to support the first phrase ( claim or generalization).

So I will pick D over E.
_________________

hey ya......

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

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

 [#permalink] New post 27 Oct 2005, 05:39
it's a straight (E).

i thought (B) was close, but the falsity of the evidence (2nd bold) will not weaken the first, since the first says 'few companies'.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 11 May 2004
Posts: 460
Location: New York
Followers: 1

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

Re: CR BF... [#permalink] New post 27 Oct 2005, 06:20
I would go with E.

I worked backwards with the bolded areas noticing that the second was an example that supports the first bold items.

fresinha12 wrote:
Few businesses will voluntarily implement environmental protection measures that benefit the public if those measures reduce profitability. Even though such measures may cost less to implement than the total value of their benefits to society, the company making the decision bears all of the cost and receives little, if any, of the benefit. For example, XYZ Corporation has for the last 10 years refused to install smokestack filters to reduce the air pollution emitted by its factory, claiming that the cost would be prohibitive. Therefore, if such measures are to be implemented to protect the environment, they must be initiated by government regulation or intervention.

The bolded portions of the argument above perform which of the following functions?

The first phrase states the conclusion, and the second provides evidence, the truth of which supports the validity of the conclusion

The first phrase states a premise supporting the conclusion, and the second provides evidence, the falsity of which would disprove the first phrase.

The first phrase describes a general principle, and the second provides evidence countering that principle

The first phrase states a claim supporting the conclusion, but for which no evidence is given, and the second describes an example supporting the conclusion.

The first phrase states a generalization supporting the conclusion, and the second cites an example supporting that generalization
SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 1743
Location: Dhaka
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 27 Oct 2005, 15:17
OA pleae......
_________________

hey ya......

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 05 Jan 2005
Posts: 254
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 28 Oct 2005, 12:28
Clear E !
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 315
Location: Los Angeles
Followers: 1

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

 [#permalink] New post 29 Oct 2005, 01:31
OA Fresinha?
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 29 Aug 2005
Posts: 503
Followers: 2

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

 [#permalink] New post 29 Oct 2005, 04:31
It is E.
The first phrase is a generalization and the second phrase is a example supporting it. What needs to be understood is that it is just an example and not an evidence.
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 09 Jul 2005
Posts: 595
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 0

Re: CR BF... [#permalink] New post 29 Oct 2005, 05:15
For me the second phase is an example to support the conclusion, which is presented at the end of the text. The second phrase is not a piece of evidence. Therefore, IMO, A, B and C are out. D should be left out because the second phase of the text gives some evidente to support that claim. E should be the correct answer.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Jul 2005
Posts: 405
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 07 Nov 2005, 19:38
The conclusion is obvious: "Therefore, if such measures are to be implemented to protect the environment, they must be initiated by government regulation or intervention. "


Evidence: "XYZ......" (the second bold face)

a) Out: First BF does not state the conclusion

b) Out: The first BF because it is not the premise. Definition of premise: "a statement that if assumed to be true from which a conclusion be drawn."

c) Out: It is not a general principle since the scope is too narrow

d) Out: Does support the conclusion. Only evidence supports the conclusion.

I pick E.
SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 1743
Location: Dhaka
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 10 Nov 2005, 14:27
we need to know the OA here :-D
_________________

hey ya......

SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 1816
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

 [#permalink] New post 10 Nov 2005, 17:30
E.

OA is desperately needed fresinha12
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 187
Followers: 1

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

 [#permalink] New post 10 Nov 2005, 18:30
I have seen this in the OG (I think), I am pretty sure OA is E.
SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 24 Sep 2005
Posts: 1898
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 0

Re: CR BF... [#permalink] New post 10 Nov 2005, 18:43
fresinha12 wrote:
[b]Few businesses will voluntarily implement environmental protection measures that benefit the public if those measures reduce profitability[/b]. Even though such measures may cost less to implement than the total value of their benefits to society, the company making the decision bears all of the cost and receives little, if any, of the benefit. For example, XYZ Corporation has for the last 10 years refused to install smokestack filters to reduce the air pollution emitted by its factory, claiming that the cost would be prohibitive. Therefore, if such measures are to be implemented to protect the environment, they must be initiated by government regulation or intervention.

The bolded portions of the argument above perform which of the following functions?

The first phrase states the conclusion, and the second provides evidence, the truth of which supports the validity of the conclusion

The first phrase states a premise supporting the conclusion, and the second provides evidence, the falsity of which would disprove the first phrase.

The first phrase describes a general principle, and the second provides evidence countering that principle

The first phrase states a claim supporting the conclusion, but for which no evidence is given, and the second describes an example supporting the conclusion.

The first phrase states a generalization supporting the conclusion, and the second cites an example supporting that generalization


A:The conclusion is the sentence containing "therefore" ---> the first bold part can't be the conclusion---> A out.

B: the first bold part says "few" ---> not all ---> the falsity of the second bold part CAN'T disprove the first phrase!---> B out.

C is clearly wrong, the second bold part doesn't counter the first bold part.

D: The bold part doesn't support the conclusion, it supports the first bold part ---> out

E it is.
Re: CR BF...   [#permalink] 10 Nov 2005, 18:43
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
16 Experts publish their posts in the topic A veterinary pharmaceutical manufacturer implemented shailendrasharma 13 16 Jul 2013, 04:00
Experts publish their posts in the topic Are you reapplying to business school? A Few Tips PaulLanzillotti 0 02 Nov 2010, 15:13
Experts publish their posts in the topic Applying to Business School in a Few Years? A Few Tips. PaulLanzillotti 1 02 Nov 2010, 14:48
9 Experts publish their posts in the topic Few businesses will voluntarily implement environmental reply2spg 29 19 Mar 2010, 16:19
27 Experts publish their posts in the topic Recently implemented skim 36 04 Jun 2009, 19:29
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Few businesses will voluntarily implement environmental

  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®.