It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club App Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 09 Dec 2016, 18:34

### 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 illogical to infer a second and different effect from

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

VP
Joined: 21 Mar 2006
Posts: 1134
Location: Bangalore
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 0

It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Jan 2007, 20:26
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from a cause which is known only by one particular effect. This is incorrect because the inferred effect must necessarily be produced by some different characteristic of the cause than is the observed effect, which already serves entirely to describe the cause.

Which one of the following arguments makes the same logical error as the one described by the author in the passage?

(A) An anonymous donor gave a thousand dollars to our historical society. I would guess that that individual also volunteers at the childrenâ€™s hospital.
(B) The radioactive material caused a genetic mutation, which, in turn, caused the birth defect. Therefore, the radioactive material caused the birth defect.
(C) The tiny, unseen atom is the source of immense power. It must be its highly complex structure that produces this power.
(D) The city orchestra received more funds from the local government this year than ever before. Clearly this administration is more civic-minded than previous ones.
(E) If I heat water, which is a liquid, it evaporates. If I heat hundreds of other liquids like water, they evaporate. Therefore, if I heat any liquid like water, it will evaporate.

Totally lost on this one
If you have any questions
New!
SVP
Joined: 08 Nov 2006
Posts: 1559
Location: Ann Arbor
Schools: Ross '10
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 189 [1] , given: 1

Re: CR1000 - logical error [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jan 2007, 10:59
1
KUDOS
kripalkavi wrote:
It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from a cause which is known only by one particular effect. This is incorrect because the inferred effect must necessarily be produced by some different characteristic of the cause than is the observed effect, which already serves entirely to describe the cause.

Which one of the following arguments makes the same logical error as the one described by the author in the passage?

(A) An anonymous donor gave a thousand dollars to our historical society. I would guess that that individual also volunteers at the childrenâ€™s hospital.
(B) The radioactive material caused a genetic mutation, which, in turn, caused the birth defect. Therefore, the radioactive material caused the birth defect.
(C) The tiny, unseen atom is the source of immense power. It must be its highly complex structure that produces this power.
(D) The city orchestra received more funds from the local government this year than ever before. Clearly this administration is more civic-minded than previous ones.
(E) If I heat water, which is a liquid, it evaporates. If I heat hundreds of other liquids like water, they evaporate. Therefore, if I heat any liquid like water, it will evaporate.

Totally lost on this one

The argument needs an answer which has 2 different effects attributed to 1 cause. Of all the answer choices, only A meets this criteria.

Choice A

Cause - Anonymous donor
Effect 1 - Donation to historical society
Effect 2 - Volunteers at children's hospital

The only fact we know is that the anonymous donor donated to the historical society. The inference that the donor also volunteers at the children's hospital is illogical.

Choice B is intriguing. Here Cause A effects B and B effects C. The statement implies that Cause A effects C by causing effect B. This reasoning is logical.

I will go with A.
_________________

My Profile/GMAT/MBA Story
http://www.gmatclub.com/forum/111-t59345

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Director
Joined: 24 Aug 2006
Posts: 751
Location: Dallas, Texas
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 141 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

30 Jan 2007, 22:35
A !

smells like LSAT question
_________________

"Education is what remains when one has forgotten everything he learned in school."

VP
Joined: 22 Oct 2006
Posts: 1443
Schools: Chicago Booth '11
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 184 [0], given: 12

### Show Tags

30 Jan 2007, 23:21
definitely a hard one, but I will go with A as well, 2nd statement has no bearing on the cause and effect as the first statement already "serves entirely to describe the cause"
VP
Joined: 21 Mar 2006
Posts: 1134
Location: Bangalore
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

31 Jan 2007, 01:56
Swagatalakshmi wrote:
A !

smells like LSAT question

You smelt right. OA is A. Understood

- One cause (donor) leads to an effect (\$1000 to society). Inferring another effect (volunteer at children's hospital) from the same cause (donor) is illogical.

Manager
Joined: 21 Oct 2005
Posts: 99
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 0

Re: CR1000 - logical error [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Jan 2008, 03:28
A it is
Re: CR1000 - logical error   [#permalink] 16 Jan 2008, 03:28
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
2 Is there a difference between inference and must be true 2 24 Oct 2012, 13:17
1 It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from 4 25 Jan 2010, 09:19
4 It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from 17 17 Oct 2009, 08:50
6 It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from 12 17 Jun 2009, 22:21
2 It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from 2 29 Jan 2008, 00:24
Display posts from previous: Sort by