Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) - Page 5
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 19 Jan 2017, 21:58

### 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

# Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Affiliations: ACA, CPA
Joined: 26 Apr 2009
Posts: 441
Location: Vagabond
Schools: BC
WE 1: Big4, Audit
WE 2: Banking
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 86 [0], given: 41

### Show Tags

19 Sep 2009, 07:23
How would you negate D?

powerka wrote:
Franklin wrote:
Quote:
Reza: Language requires the use of verbal signs for objects as well as for feelings. Many animals can vocally express hunger, but only humans can ask for an egg or an apple by naming it. And using verbal signs for objects requires the ability to distinguish these objects from other objects, which in turn requires conceptual thought.

If all of Reza's statements are true, then which one of the following must also be true?

A) Conceptual thought is required for language

B) Conceptual thought requires the use of verbal signs for objects.

C) It is not possible to think conceptually about feelings.

D) All humans are capable of conceptual thought.

E) The vocal expressions of animals other than humans do not require conceptual thought.

Language <---- verbal signs <---- ability to distinguish <---- conceptual thought.

_________________

If you have made mistakes, there is always another chance for you. You may have a fresh start any moment you choose, for this thing we call "failure" is not the falling down, but the staying down.

Senior Manager
Affiliations: ACA, CPA
Joined: 26 Apr 2009
Posts: 441
Location: Vagabond
Schools: BC
WE 1: Big4, Audit
WE 2: Banking
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 86 [0], given: 41

### Show Tags

19 Sep 2009, 07:25
Well explained!
One more vote for C

powerka wrote:
Franklin wrote:
Quote:
Almost all microbe species live together in dense, interdependent communities, supporting the environment for each other, and regulating the population balances for their different species through a complex system of chemical signals. For this reason, it is currently impossible to cultivate any one such species in isolation. Thus, microbiologists lack complete knowledge of most microbe species.

Which one of the following, if assumed, enables the argument's conclusion to be properly drawn?

A) It is currently impossible for microbiologists to reproduce the complex system of chemical signals with which microbe communities regulate the population balances for their different species.

B) If it is currently impossible to reproduce the environmental supports and chemical signals in dense, interdependent communities of microbe species, then it is also impossible to cultivate any microbe species from such a community in isolation.

C) No microbiologist can have complete knowledge of any species of organism unless that microbiologist can cultivate that species in isolation.

D) At least some microbiologists lack complete knowledge of any microbe species that live together in dense, interdependent communities.

E) No microbe species that normally lives together with other microbe species in dense, interdependent communities can survive outside such a community.

Rephrase:
1) For reason X it is impossible to cultivate microbe species in isolation.
2) "Thus, microbiologists lack complete knowledge of most microbe species."
We are asked what assumption enables 2) to be concluded based on 1).

Only answer choices that mention "complete knowledge" are C and D.

Lets analyze C:
Given that it is impossible to cultivate microbe species in isolation (1), and that "no microbiologist can have complete knowledge of any species of organism unless that microbiologist can cultivate that species in isolation" (c), then it could be concluded that "microbiologists lack complete knowledge of most microbe species" (2).
---> I believe the answer is C. What makes me doubt is the word "most" on the answer, as following that line of reasoning microbiologists would lack complete knowledge of all microbe species, not most.

Lets analyze D:
"At least some microbiologists lack complete knowledge of any microbe species that live together in dense, interdependent communities"
---> D is another possible conclusion, not the assumption needed to conclude 2.

_________________

If you have made mistakes, there is always another chance for you. You may have a fresh start any moment you choose, for this thing we call "failure" is not the falling down, but the staying down.

Manager
Joined: 22 Jul 2009
Posts: 191
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 259 [0], given: 18

### Show Tags

19 Sep 2009, 07:38
How would you negate D?

Language requires the use of verbal signs for objects as well as for feelings. Many animals can vocally express hunger, but only humans can ask for an egg or an apple by naming it. And using verbal signs for objects requires the ability to distinguish these objects from other objects, which in turn requires conceptual thought.

1. Language requires the use of verbal signs.
2. only humans can ask for an egg or an apple by naming it.
3. using verbal signs for objects requires the ability to distinguish these objects from other objects
4. which in turn requires conceptual thought.

#2 says only humans can use verbal signs ---- it does not say all humans can use verbal signs.

Saying "all humans" is a generalization that is not necessarily true in the question at hand.

And in fact, is not true in reality; not all humans are capable of "speaking".

In GMAT the word "all" should raise caution in test takers.
_________________

Please kudos if my post helps.

Intern
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Posts: 9
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

19 Sep 2009, 23:24
powerka wrote:
Franklin wrote:
Quote:
Reza: Language requires the use of verbal signs for objects as well as for feelings. Many animals can vocally express hunger, but only humans can ask for an egg or an apple by naming it. And using verbal signs for objects requires the ability to distinguish these objects from other objects, which in turn requires conceptual thought.

If all of Reza's statements are true, then which one of the following must also be true?

A) Conceptual thought is required for language

B) Conceptual thought requires the use of verbal signs for objects.

C) It is not possible to think conceptually about feelings.

D) All humans are capable of conceptual thought.

E) The vocal expressions of animals other than humans do not require conceptual thought.

Language <---- verbal signs <---- ability to distinguish <---- conceptual thought.

even i would go with A.

The logic that can be applied here is that whenever there is a cause and effect type of question, then u need to draw them.
Moving backward,

here, CT ( conceptual thought) -> Ability to distinguish -> verbal signs -> language.

thus, CT -> Language.

in a must be true ques or a conclusion, the sufficient condition ie the language must occur when the necessary condition ie the CT has occured.
Current Student
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 187
Location: Ithaca, New York
Schools: Cornell University - The Johnson School
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 62

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2009, 09:43
Quote:
The ability to access information via computer is a tremendous resource for visually impaired people. Only a limited amount of printed information is accessible in braille, large type, or audiotape. But a person with the right hardware and software can access a large quantity of information from libraries and museums around the world, and can have the computer read the information aloud, display it in large type, or produce a braille version. Thus, visually impaired people can now access information from computers more easily than they can from most traditional sources.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

A) A computerized speech synthesizer is often less expensive than a complete library of audiotapes.

B) Relatively easy-to-use computer systems that can read information aloud, display it in large type, or produce a braille version of it are widely available.

C) Many visually impaired people prefer traditional sources of information to computers that can read information aloud, display it in large type, or produce a braille version of it.

E) The rate at which printed information is converted into formats easily accessible to visually impaired people will increase.
Current Student
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 187
Location: Ithaca, New York
Schools: Cornell University - The Johnson School
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 62

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2009, 09:57
This one will cause some heartburn!

Quote:
Political Scientist: The economies of a number of European countries are currently in severe difficulty. Germany is the only neighboring country that has the resources to resuscitate these economies. Therefore, Germany should begin aiding these economically troubled countries.

Which one of the following principles most helps to justify the political scientist's reasoning?

A) Any nation that alone has an obligation to economically resuscitate neighboring countries ought to be the only nation to provide any economic aid.

B) Any nation that alone has the capacity to economically resuscitate neighboring countries should exercise that capacity.

C) Any nation that can afford to give economic aid to just a few other nations ought to aid just those few.

D) Only nations that alone have the capacity to economically resuscitate neighboring countries should exercise that capacity.

E) Only nations that can afford to give economic aid to just a few other nations ought to aid just those few.
Intern
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Posts: 9
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2009, 11:34
i think that the answer is B for both of them.
Manager
Joined: 22 Jul 2009
Posts: 191
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 259 [0], given: 18

### Show Tags

22 Sep 2009, 08:50
I agree with the previous poster: B for both.
_________________

Please kudos if my post helps.

Director
Joined: 27 Jun 2008
Posts: 546
WE 1: Investment Banking - 6yrs
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 62 [0], given: 92

### Show Tags

22 Sep 2009, 12:43
Franklin wrote:
Quote:
The ability to access information via computer is a tremendous resource for visually impaired people. Only a limited amount of printed information is accessible in braille, large type, or audiotape. But a person with the right hardware and software can access a large quantity of information from libraries and museums around the world, and can have the computer read the information aloud, display it in large type, or produce a braille version. Thus, visually impaired people can now access information from computers more easily than they can from most traditional sources.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

A) A computerized speech synthesizer is often less expensive than a complete library of audiotapes.

B) Relatively easy-to-use computer systems that can read information aloud, display it in large type, or produce a braille version of it are widely available.

C) Many visually impaired people prefer traditional sources of information to computers that can read information aloud, display it in large type, or produce a braille version of it.

E) The rate at which printed information is converted into formats easily accessible to visually impaired people will increase.

I get B
Director
Joined: 27 Jun 2008
Posts: 546
WE 1: Investment Banking - 6yrs
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 62 [0], given: 92

### Show Tags

22 Sep 2009, 12:44
Franklin wrote:
This one will cause some heartburn!

Quote:
Political Scientist: The economies of a number of European countries are currently in severe difficulty. Germany is the only neighboring country that has the resources to resuscitate these economies. Therefore, Germany should begin aiding these economically troubled countries.

Which one of the following principles most helps to justify the political scientist's reasoning?

A) Any nation that alone has an obligation to economically resuscitate neighboring countries ought to be the only nation to provide any economic aid.

B) Any nation that alone has the capacity to economically resuscitate neighboring countries should exercise that capacity.

C) Any nation that can afford to give economic aid to just a few other nations ought to aid just those few.

D) Only nations that alone have the capacity to economically resuscitate neighboring countries should exercise that capacity.

E) Only nations that can afford to give economic aid to just a few other nations ought to aid just those few.

I eliminated A,D & E - because of the usage of "only"
Not sure with B & C...on the exam, I'd go with B.
Current Student
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 187
Location: Ithaca, New York
Schools: Cornell University - The Johnson School
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 47 [1] , given: 62

### Show Tags

23 Sep 2009, 17:54
1
KUDOS
Quote:
In addition to the labor and materials used to make wine, the reputation of the vineyard where the grapes originate plays a role in determining the price of the finished wine. Therefore, an expensive wine is not always a good wine.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A) The price of a bottle of wine should be a reflection of the wine's quality.

B) Price is never an accurate indication of the quality of a bottle of wine.

C) The reputation of a vineyard does not always indicate the quality of its wines.

D) The reputation of a vineyard generally plays a greater role than the quality of its grapes in determining its wines' prices.

E) Wines produced by lesser-known vineyards generally are priced to reflect accurately the wines' quality.
Intern
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Posts: 9
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

23 Sep 2009, 23:33
In addition to the labor and materials used to make wine, the reputation of the vineyard where the grapes originate plays a role in determining the price of the finished wine. Therefore, an expensive wine is not always a good wine.

i think the answer is C.

Because if the reputation plays a role in determining the price, then the expensive wine must have originated from a reputed vineyard. Also the conclusion states that an expensive wine is not always a good wine. The assumption connecting these two is answer C that the reputation does not mean quality ( here quality is used in place of good wine).
Manager
Joined: 22 Jul 2009
Posts: 191
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 259 [1] , given: 18

### Show Tags

24 Sep 2009, 04:34
1
KUDOS
I say C.
_________________

Please kudos if my post helps.

Founder
Affiliations: AS - Gold, HH-Diamond
Joined: 04 Dec 2002
Posts: 14449
Location: United States (WA)
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V42
GPA: 3.5
Followers: 3717

Kudos [?]: 23000 [0], given: 4514

### Show Tags

26 Sep 2009, 20:33
Franklin - just wanted to say - great job!
_________________

Founder of GMAT Club

US News Rankings progression - last 10 years in a snapshot - New!
Just starting out with GMAT? Start here...
Need GMAT Book Recommendations? Best GMAT Books

Co-author of the GMAT Club tests

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Current Student
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 187
Location: Ithaca, New York
Schools: Cornell University - The Johnson School
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 62

### Show Tags

27 Sep 2009, 04:02
bb wrote:
Franklin - just wanted to say - great job!

Thanks bb! I appreciate your support!

Sorry everyone about not posting for a little while. Midterms are coming up and the workload is kicking my rear end. I'll make it up to you guys by posting a couple every other day or so .... Here we go!

Quote:
Most plants have developed chemical defenses against parasites. The average plant contains about 40 natural pesticides - chemical compounds toxic to bacteria, fungi, and other parasites. Humans ingest these natural pesticides without harm every day. Therefore, the additional threat posed by synthetic pesticides sprayed on crop plants by humans is minimal.

Each of the following, if true, weakens the argument EXCEPT:

A) Humans have been consuming natural plant pesticides from millennia and have had time to adapt to them.

B) The concentrations of natural pesticides in plants are typically much lower than the concentrations of synthetic pesticides in sprayed crop plants.

C) Natural plant pesticides are typically less potent than synthetic pesticides, whose toxicity is highly concentrated.

D) Natural plant pesticides generally serve only as defenses against specific parasites, whereas synthetic pesticides are often harmful to a wide variety of organisms.

E) The synthetic pesticides sprayed on crop plants by humans usually have chemical structures similar to those of the natural pesticides produced by the plants.
Current Student
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 187
Location: Ithaca, New York
Schools: Cornell University - The Johnson School
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 47 [3] , given: 62

### Show Tags

27 Sep 2009, 04:14
3
KUDOS

As you can tell I give out Kudos like they're going out of style. Besides the well-deserved praise from your peers and the blessings from the GMAT gods for posting your reasoning, I may shower you with kudos for your effort ... just a little extra incentive for those who care about that sort of thing!
Manager
Joined: 22 Jul 2009
Posts: 191
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 259 [0], given: 18

### Show Tags

27 Sep 2009, 16:31
Franklin wrote:
Quote:
Most plants have developed chemical defenses against parasites. The average plant contains about 40 natural pesticides - chemical compounds toxic to bacteria, fungi, and other parasites. Humans ingest these natural pesticides without harm every day. Therefore, the additional threat posed by synthetic pesticides sprayed on crop plants by humans is minimal.

Each of the following, if true, weakens the argument EXCEPT:

A) Humans have been consuming natural plant pesticides from millennia and have had time to adapt to them.

B) The concentrations of natural pesticides in plants are typically much lower than the concentrations of synthetic pesticides in sprayed crop plants.

C) Natural plant pesticides are typically less potent than synthetic pesticides, whose toxicity is highly concentrated.

D) Natural plant pesticides generally serve only as defenses against specific parasites, whereas synthetic pesticides are often harmful to a wide variety of organisms.

E) The synthetic pesticides sprayed on crop plants by humans usually have chemical structures similar to those of the natural pesticides produced by the plants.

Answer E clearly is the only option that does not weaken the argument. In fact, it may even strengthen it.

Sorry Franklin, can't give a better explanation; as with most CR questions on this thread, I found the answers pretty straightforward.

Cheers,
_________________

Please kudos if my post helps.

Current Student
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 187
Location: Ithaca, New York
Schools: Cornell University - The Johnson School
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 62

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2009, 02:58
powerka wrote:
Franklin wrote:
Quote:
Most plants have developed chemical defenses against parasites. The average plant contains about 40 natural pesticides - chemical compounds toxic to bacteria, fungi, and other parasites. Humans ingest these natural pesticides without harm every day. Therefore, the additional threat posed by synthetic pesticides sprayed on crop plants by humans is minimal.

Each of the following, if true, weakens the argument EXCEPT:

A) Humans have been consuming natural plant pesticides from millennia and have had time to adapt to them.

B) The concentrations of natural pesticides in plants are typically much lower than the concentrations of synthetic pesticides in sprayed crop plants.

C) Natural plant pesticides are typically less potent than synthetic pesticides, whose toxicity is highly concentrated.

D) Natural plant pesticides generally serve only as defenses against specific parasites, whereas synthetic pesticides are often harmful to a wide variety of organisms.

E) The synthetic pesticides sprayed on crop plants by humans usually have chemical structures similar to those of the natural pesticides produced by the plants.

Answer E clearly is the only option that does not weaken the argument. In fact, it may even strengthen it.

Sorry Franklin, can't give a better explanation; as with most CR questions on this thread, I found the answers pretty straightforward.

Cheers,

No sweat!
Current Student
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 187
Location: Ithaca, New York
Schools: Cornell University - The Johnson School
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 47 [0], given: 62

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2009, 03:10
The Law School Admission Council created this question back in 2003-4 ... I thought the question to be quite prophetic!

Quote:
The economy is doing badly. First, the real estate slump has been with us for some time. Second, car sales are at their lowest in years. Of course, had either one or the other phenomenon failed to occur, this would be consistent with the economy as a whole being healthy. But, their occurrence together makes it quite probable that my conclusion is correct.

Which one of the following inferences is most strongly supported by the information above?

A) If car sales are at their lowest in years, then it is likely that the economy is doing badly.

B) If the economy is doing badly, then either the real estate market or the car sales market is not healthy.

C) If the real estate market is healthy, then it is likely that the economy as a whole is healthy.

D) If the economy is in a healthy state, then it is unlikely that the real estate and car sales markets are both in a slump.

E) The bad condition of the economy implies that both the real estate and the car sales markets are doing badly.
Intern
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Posts: 9
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2009, 03:38
A) If car sales are at their lowest in years, then it is likely that the economy is doing badly.

B) If the economy is doing badly, then either the real estate market or the car sales market is not healthy.

C) If the real estate market is healthy, then it is likely that the economy as a whole is healthy.

D) If the economy is in a healthy state, then it is unlikely that the real estate and car sales markets are both in a slump.

E) The bad condition of the economy implies that both the real estate and the car sales markets are doing badly.

i think the answer is D. Because it is saying that if either of the phenomenon ( real estate slump or car sales being lowest) failed to occur then the economy would have been in a healthy state. from this we can infer that if the economy is in a healthy state then it is unlikely that both the phenomenon occured.
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread   [#permalink] 29 Sep 2009, 03:38

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9    Next  [ 168 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
2 Critical Reasoning Question - Clarification 1 14 May 2015, 01:43
1 Critical Reasoning question doubt 0 17 Nov 2014, 07:23
Help with Critical Reasoning Questions 5 22 Feb 2012, 20:17
11 Causality in Critical Reasoning Questions 6 07 Jan 2012, 21:43
Critical Reasoning Question 2 12 Jul 2009, 02:39
Display posts from previous: Sort by