Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since collard greens

Answer A. Time to solve: 30 sec
K>S and C>L --> K>L so K must be > C
A) Says C>K --> Wrong

Kale - K
Spinach - S
Collard Greens - C
Lettuce - L

Given K > S. Since C > L, thus K > L.
For the last if then case, to be true, either K > C or/and L > S.
So, anything that goes against the above rules is the coorect AO.
A says K < C. No need to check further or make an attempt to eliminate other options! A is correct.

A is the correct answer.

Premise 1 - K>S
Premise 2 - C>L
Assumption 1- S>L
Assumption 2- S>C
Assumption 3- S=C
Assumption 4- K=C
Except- C>K

Read the question carefully. The word "EXCEPT" is very important to note. If you skip the last word then you might fall into the trap.

Once you have made a note of this word "EXCEPT" then it is easy to understand that all the 4 options (B-E) satisfy the conditions given in stimulus "EXCEPT" option A.

Hence Option A is the correct ans.

Official Explanation:-

Argument Construction

Situation Using the symbol > to mean “has (or have) more nutritional value than,” this statement can be expressed as kale > spinach, and collard greens > lettuce. The conclusion that kale > lettuce remains valid if all but one of the premises is added.

Reasoning Which premise makes the conclusion incorrect? The information given in the passage is that kale > spinach and that collard greens > lettuce. This is not enough to conclude that kale > lettuce; another premise is needed to establish the relative nutritional value of kale and lettuce. Look at each premise offered in the answers to see whether the conclusion kale > lettuce remains valid. The ranking of vegetables may change with the additional premises; the conclusion, kale > lettuce, must not change. Find the one answer that does NOT support the conclusion.

A Correct. This statement properly identifies an additional premise that would invalidate the argument. If collard greens > kale, then it is possible that lettuce > kale, because the ranking could be collard greens > lettuce > kale > spinach.

B If spinach > lettuce, then kale > lettuce because kale > spinach.

C If spinach > collard greens, then kale > lettuce because the ranking would then be kale > spinach > collard greens > lettuce.

D If spinach = collard greens, then kale > lettuce because the ranking would be kale > spinach = collard greens > lettuce.

E If kale = collard greens, then kale > lettuce because kale = collard greens > lettuce.

The correct answer is A.

Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. (K > S)
Collard greens have more nutritional value than lettuce (CG > L)

Conclusion: Kale has more nutritional value than lettuce. (K > L)

There is no relevance of 'but'. We just get this info from the argument and this is what it concludes.
What will help establish the conclusion and what will not?

If we know that S > CG, or S > L or K > CG etc we can prove that the conclusion holds.

A. Collard greens have more nutritional value than kale
CG > K. K could still be less than or greater than L.
Does not help prove the conclusion.

Answer (A)­

1. K> S
2. C >L

given that 3. K> L

hence only 2 possibilities
K>S>=C>L or K>C>=S>L



hence clearly A does not fit into it

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.