It is easy to see that the board of directors of the : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 21 Jan 2017, 09:47

### 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

# It is easy to see that the board of directors of the

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 10 Nov 2010
Posts: 164
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 275 [2] , given: 6

It is easy to see that the board of directors of the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Mar 2011, 20:29
2
KUDOS
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

39% (02:35) correct 61% (01:56) wrong based on 231 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

It is easy to see that the board of directors of the
construction company is full of corruption and should
be replaced. There are many instances of bribery by
various persons on the staff of board member Wagston
that are a matter of public record. These bribes
perniciously influenced the awarding of government
contracts.
The argument’s reasoning is most vulnerable to
criticism on the grounds that
(A) the argument fails to show that corruption is not
limited to Wagston’s staff
(B) the argument fails to show that Wagston’s staff
engaged in any bribery other than bribery of
government officials
(C) the argument fails to specify the relation
between bribery and corruption
(D) the argument presumes without giving
justification that all of Wagston’s staff have
engaged in corruption
(E) the argument attempts to deflect attention away
from substantive issues by attacking the
character of the board
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Last edited by vjsharma25 on 12 Mar 2011, 23:00, edited 1 time in total.
If you have any questions
New!
Director
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 920
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 341 [0], given: 123

Re: Corruption of board of directors [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Mar 2011, 22:18
Its B. The arg should state who is taking the bribe otherwise it is vulnerable to criticism.
Manager
Joined: 10 Nov 2010
Posts: 164
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 275 [0], given: 6

Re: Corruption of board of directors [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Mar 2011, 22:47
B only says that the argument should mention about different sources of bribes from where staff is getting the bribe,But what about the board of directors? It has to show that board of directors are involved in some way or other.Because the argument is about that idea.
Manager
Joined: 28 Feb 2010
Posts: 176
WE 1: 3 (Mining Operations)
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 32 [0], given: 33

Re: Corruption of board of directors [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Mar 2011, 22:51
IMO C because Corruption is a larger term to be issued to bribery. For better support, the linkage between bribe and corruption must be established. Not sure of my reasoning, but among other options, Option C fits the bill.
@ Vjsharma : whts the correct ans !!
_________________

Regards,
Invincible...
"The way to succeed is to double your error rate."
"Most people who succeed in the face of seemingly impossible conditions are people who simply don't know how to quit."

Director
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 920
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 341 [0], given: 123

Re: Corruption of board of directors [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Mar 2011, 22:58
Is it D? "presumes" is a wrong and assuming "all - go" is wrong.
Director
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 920
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 341 [0], given: 123

Re: Corruption of board of directors [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Mar 2011, 23:00
I think its C finally
Manager
Joined: 10 Nov 2010
Posts: 164
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 275 [1] , given: 6

Re: Corruption of board of directors [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Mar 2011, 23:02
1
KUDOS
Posted the official answer. I think its a very good question,which requires to read the TEXT of answer choices very closely.
Director
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 920
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 341 [0], given: 123

Re: Corruption of board of directors [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Mar 2011, 23:04
+1 Brilliant question ! I will use this reasoning
Manager
Joined: 28 Feb 2010
Posts: 176
WE 1: 3 (Mining Operations)
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 32 [0], given: 33

Re: Corruption of board of directors [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Mar 2011, 23:40
Help me friends, to me the answer is still not clear.
Option A says that "the argument fails to show that corruption is not limited to Wagston’s staff"
Suppose we eliminate this loop hole in the argument, and now the argument says that corruption is rampant in construction companies.
However, even this inclusion does not makes an impeccable argument. The author concern is that if any board is corrupt, it must be replaced !!...if all the companies are corrupt, the this exercise extends to all.

Option C is also not a perfect fit, but other options can be easily eliminated..
_________________

Regards,
Invincible...
"The way to succeed is to double your error rate."
"Most people who succeed in the face of seemingly impossible conditions are people who simply don't know how to quit."

Manager
Joined: 10 Nov 2010
Posts: 164
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 275 [1] , given: 6

Re: Corruption of board of directors [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Mar 2011, 23:56
1
KUDOS
The argument has a logical flaw in deriving its conclusion

Con: Board of directors are corrupt and should be replaced.
Premise: staff of the Wagston is taking bribes.
Logical gap: Argument provides no information to assess that the board members are also involved in the bribery.

It makes a generalization on the basis of the subset(Wagston's staff),which may or may not include the board members.
Director
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 920
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 341 [0], given: 123

Re: Corruption of board of directors [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Mar 2011, 00:09
This argument is based on probability not certainty. To effect any direct conclusion and link its bad effect on the Govt contracts, the premise should state categorically that Wagston's staff ALONE are responsible. Clearly the argument fails to confirm this and is therefore questionable.

We have learnt from reasoning concepts that any alternate cause will weaken the causal argument. So be it !
Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 498
WE 1: 4 years Tech
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 139 [0], given: 149

Re: Corruption of board of directors [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Mar 2011, 01:09
Even D is a Weakener.To Blame the whole of wagstons staff for the wrongs of a few ppl on his staff is unjustified.
What are the others' views ?
_________________

My Post Invites Discussions not answers
Try to give back something to the Forum.I want your explanations, right now !

Intern
Joined: 23 Oct 2014
Posts: 3
GMAT 1: 730 Q48 V42
Followers: 0

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

Re: It is easy to see that the board of directors of the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jan 2015, 11:50
Quote:
Even D is a Weakener.To Blame the whole of wagstons staff for the wrongs of a few ppl on his staff is unjustified.
What are the others' views ?

You may be correct but this is not what question asked. By choosing this answer you imply that there are no board members other than Wagston (this is not true, though).

Conclusion very specifically says that "It is easy to see that the board of directors of the construction company is full of corruption and should be replaced."

Point A directly reflects on that.
Manager
Joined: 22 Jun 2016
Posts: 60
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 4

Re: It is easy to see that the board of directors of the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Oct 2016, 15:10
In the argument 2 statements run in parallel

It is easy to see that the board of directors of the
construction company is full of corruption and should
be replaced. There are many instances of bribery by
various persons on the staff of board member Wagston
that are a matter of public record. These bribes
perniciously influenced the awarding of government
contracts.

Example of bribery influence is government contracts. Company is full of corruption. Where is corruption means bribery mentioned? Corruptions could be many others either by internal politics, reduction of quotation because of other intention and so.

The relation ship b/w bribery and corruption is not clearly show and it is the weaken part in the arugment.

Re: It is easy to see that the board of directors of the   [#permalink] 15 Oct 2016, 15:10
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
2 The Breton Symphony Orchestra board of directors and the 5 15 Aug 2009, 01:23
To avoid a hostile takeover attempt, the board of directors 13 03 Nov 2008, 10:49
To avoid a hostile takeover attempt, the board of directors 7 08 Jul 2008, 12:27
5 To avoid a hostile takeover attempt, the board of directors 12 21 Mar 2008, 08:25
o avoid a hostile takeover attempt, the board of directors 4 27 Mar 2007, 15:08
Display posts from previous: Sort by