|
Author |
Message |
|
Director
Joined: 10 Oct 2005
Posts: 533
Location: US
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 0
|
The simple facts are these: the number of people killed each year by grizzly bears is about the same as the number of people killed by lightning on golf courses. And the number of people killed by lightning on golf courses each year is about the same as the number of people electrocuted by electric blenders. All the horrible myths and gruesome stories aside, therefore, a grizzly bear is in fact about as dangerous as an electric blender or a game of golf.
Which one of the following is an assumption that the author relies upon in the passage?
(A) Most incidents involving grizzly bears are fatal.
(B) Grizzly bears are no longer the danger they once were.
(C) The number of fatalities per year is an adequate indication of something’s dangerousness.
(D) A golf course is a particularly dangerous place to be in a thunderstorm.
(E) Something is dangerous only if it results in death in the majority of cases.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Posts: 1356
Followers: 6
Kudos [?]:
17
[0], given: 0
|
E. if E is not true, the argument doesnot hold.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 950
Location: France
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 0
|
C...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 15 Mar 2005
Posts: 432
Location: Phoenix
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
7
[0], given: 0
|
C.
Since the passage tries to prove that Grizzly bears are as dangerous as golf and blenders, based on number of fatalities (which, according to passage are roughly the same in all three cases).
_________________
Who says elephants can't dance?
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Posts: 1356
Followers: 6
Kudos [?]:
17
[0], given: 0
|
kapslock wrote: C.
Since the passage tries to prove that Grizzly bears are as dangerous as golf and blenders, based on number of fatalities (which, according to passage are roughly the same in all three cases).
does the passage talk about the fatalities? nope. it talks about the number of deaths...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 10 Oct 2005
Posts: 533
Location: US
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 0
|
OA is C....
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 29 Dec 2005
Posts: 1356
Followers: 6
Kudos [?]:
17
[0], given: 0
|
mahesh004 wrote: OA is C....
source?
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Posts: 1744
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
12
[0], given: 0
|
Professor wrote: kapslock wrote: C.
Since the passage tries to prove that Grizzly bears are as dangerous as golf and blenders, based on number of fatalities (which, according to passage are roughly the same in all three cases). does the passage talk about the fatalities? nope. it talks about the number of deaths... Fatalities mean death right 
Will go with C.
The talks about three different thing and the rate of death /fatalities in each case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 14 May 2006
Posts: 1421
Followers: 4
Kudos [?]:
23
[0], given: 0
|
Professor wrote: kapslock wrote: C.
Since the passage tries to prove that Grizzly bears are as dangerous as golf and blenders, based on number of fatalities (which, according to passage are roughly the same in all three cases). does the passage talk about the fatalities? nope. it talks about the number of deaths... but professor, fatalities mean deaths... isn't that right?
i chose C also
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 27 Feb 2006
Posts: 634
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
11
[0], given: 0
|
^ C ^
E says that one thing is dangerous if it causes deaths in many ocassions. In the original question stem we have different incidents, not one common thing in all incidents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 07 Nov 2005
Posts: 1134
Location: India
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
22
[0], given: 1
|
mahesh004 wrote: The simple facts are these: the number of people killed each year by grizzly bears is about the same as the number of people killed by lightning on golf courses. And the number of people killed by lightning on golf courses each year is about the same as the number of people electrocuted by electric blenders. All the horrible myths and gruesome stories aside, therefore, a grizzly bear is in fact about as dangerous as an electric blender or a game of golf.
Which one of the following is an assumption that the author relies upon in the passage?
(A) Most incidents involving grizzly bears are fatal.
(B) Grizzly bears are no longer the danger they once were.
(C) The number of fatalities per year is an adequate indication of something’s dangerousness.
(D) A golf course is a particularly dangerous place to be in a thunderstorm.
(E) Something is dangerous only if it results in death in the majority of cases.
C is better than E.
The whole reasoning is done comparing the number of fatalities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 02 Jun 2006
Posts: 1278
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
15
[0], given: 0
|
Going with C...
Comparison between the various methods of deaths is based on equivalent number of deaths. So C.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Posts: 172
Location: Vienna, Austria
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
5
[0], given: 0
|
can someone of our CR gurus apply the assumption negation technique on this on?
cheers
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 661
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
47
[0], given: 7
|
should be a clear C
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 1305
Followers: 9
Kudos [?]:
57
[0], given: 0
|
C is fine. But how is it better than E? I mean whts wong with E?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 30 Mar 2007
Posts: 47
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
54
[3] , given: 0
|
3
This post received
KUDOS
k/y =kills per year
GB= Grizzly Bears
L= Lighting
E=Electrolocution
FACT ==> K/y due to GB = K/y due to L = K/y due to E
Conclusion ==> Danger from GB = Danger from L= Danger from E
Clearly (K/y or no of deaths) are assumed synonymous to (Danger) here. A clear cut (E).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 20 Dec 2008
Posts: 3
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
17
[1] , given: 0
|
1
This post received
KUDOS
Cool Approach. Stuck b/n C and E. Now clear on this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
VP
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1442
Followers: 28
Kudos [?]:
152
[0], given: 1
|
mahesh004 wrote: The simple facts are these: the number of people killed each year by grizzly bears is about the same as the number of people killed by lightning on golf courses. And the number of people killed by lightning on golf courses each year is about the same as the number of people electrocuted by electric blenders. All the horrible myths and gruesome stories aside, therefore, a grizzly bear is in fact about as dangerous as an electric blender or a game of golf.
Which one of the following is an assumption that the author relies upon in the passage?
(A) Most incidents involving grizzly bears are fatal.
(B) Grizzly bears are no longer the danger they once were.
(C) The number of fatalities per year is an adequate indication of something’s dangerousness.
(D) A golf course is a particularly dangerous place to be in a thunderstorm.
(E) Something is dangerous only if it results in death in the majority of cases. NP killed by GB= NP killed by L on GC = NP killed by E Conc is GB is as dangerous as EB or G Look at C and negate it. number of fatalities (deaths/NP killed) is not an adequate indication of dangerousness. Conclusion falls apart because the premises are all about numbers killed by each to reach the conclusion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
Joined: 18 Feb 2008
Posts: 798
Followers: 18
Kudos [?]:
78
[0], given: 25
|
C for me as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 80
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
24
[0], given: 0
|
go with C
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, Zarrolou, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab
|
close
