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

It is currently 01 Aug 2014, 22:48

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

Graphologists claim that it is possible to detect permanent

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
CEO
CEO
avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Posts: 3470
Followers: 59

Kudos [?]: 661 [0], given: 781

Graphologists claim that it is possible to detect permanent [#permalink] New post 27 Sep 2003, 10:17
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  5% (low)

Question Stats:

20% (02:32) correct 80% (01:24) wrong based on 11 sessions
20. Graphologists claim that it is possible to detect permanent character traits by examining people's handwriting. For example, a strong cross on the "t" is supposed to denote enthusiasm. Obviously, however, with practice and perseverance people can alter their handwriting to include this feature. So it seems that graphologists must hold that permanent character traits can be changed.

The argument against graphology proceeds by

(A) citing apparently incontestable evidence that leads to absurd consequences when conjoined with the view in question

(B) demonstrating that an apparently controversial and interesting claim is really just a platitude

(C) arguing that a particular technique of analysis can never be effective when the people analyzed know that it is being used

(D) showing that proponents of the view have no theoretical justification for the view

(E) attacking a technique by arguing that what the technique is supposed to detect can be detected quite readily without it
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 08 Jan 2003
Posts: 132
Location: Ukraine
Followers: 1

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

 [#permalink] New post 28 Sep 2003, 11:29
D is better indeed. Is it correct answer?
CEO
CEO
avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Posts: 3470
Followers: 59

Kudos [?]: 661 [0], given: 781

 [#permalink] New post 28 Sep 2003, 11:35
vaka wrote:
D is better indeed. Is it correct answer?


nope..D is incorrect

Argument does not ask for theoretical justification.
CEO
CEO
avatar
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Posts: 3470
Followers: 59

Kudos [?]: 661 [0], given: 781

 [#permalink] New post 28 Sep 2003, 11:49
vaka wrote:
A?


yes, A is correct..can you try and explain please
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 08 Jan 2003
Posts: 132
Location: Ukraine
Followers: 1

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

 [#permalink] New post 28 Sep 2003, 12:00
well, after the choices that had turned wrong I was struggling between A and B. But B just establishes the fact, whereas A gives more detailed description of method employed.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 Aug 2003
Posts: 258
Location: Bangalore
Followers: 1

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

GMAT Tests User
 [#permalink] New post 28 Sep 2003, 20:11
The argument proceeds by an example where correlation is given between two things (style of writing - effect and tarits -cause). Opponents argue what if writing style is changed, will the permanent traits also change.
Now is it not an absurd conclusion that permanent traits will change. How can something that's permanent change..!! and he acheives this by giving evidence that cannot be contested.'
thanks
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 09 Jan 2010
Posts: 128
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 12

Re: CR : Graphologists [#permalink] New post 18 Aug 2010, 11:52
good question ..its A indeed
Director
Director
avatar
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: Chicago Booth Class of 2015
Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 995
Followers: 13

Kudos [?]: 379 [0], given: 36

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR : Graphologists [#permalink] New post 18 Aug 2010, 21:37
B is wrong since there is no "claim" as such. Second we don't know if claim is "interesting" and "controversial". What we know for sure is that the evidence is tenable. A is correct.
_________________

Please press kudos if you like my post.

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 31 Jul 2010
Posts: 17
Followers: 0

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

Re: CR : Graphologists [#permalink] New post 19 Aug 2010, 11:53
A it is.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 29 Jul 2010
Posts: 44
Followers: 0

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

Re: CR : Graphologists [#permalink] New post 19 Aug 2010, 16:01
I thought of B. :)
Looks like I am wrong.
_________________

"Not everyone who works hard succeeds. But all those who succeeded have worked hard!" ~~ Coach Kamogawa

Best,
ItsNotOver

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 03 Jun 2010
Posts: 108
Followers: 2

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

Re: CR : Graphologists [#permalink] New post 27 Aug 2010, 13:18
A
Re: CR : Graphologists   [#permalink] 27 Aug 2010, 13:18
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Is This Possible? johnnyx9 51 25 Apr 2007, 07:56
Graphologists claim that it is possible to detect permanent old_dream_1976 6 24 Apr 2006, 18:37
Possible? Minnie 1 22 Jul 2005, 13:01
Graphologists claim that it is possible to detect permanent WinWinMBA 4 25 May 2005, 08:07
Apply as a permanent resident or international ? bk-mba 2 13 Sep 2004, 08:38
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Graphologists claim that it is possible to detect permanent

  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®.