Proposals for extending the United States school year to bring it more

The objection is that the reduction in the summer vacation would violate the tradition of giving a three month summer vacation. The conclusion is "The argument misses its mark" because the "The tradition is not just the 3 month vacation, the actual tradition can be traced by referring to the actual reason behind that practice i.e to make the child labour available for harvesting season"

We are looking for a general reason that follows the logic of the statement.

As per the answer choice statistics, most people were able to narrow it down to the choices D and E.

In this case, D seems appealing because it seems to follow the rationale of the given argument and even recycles some of the language (e.g. "good for the economy").

However, when we have a closer look at both D and E we notice that it is actually the statement in AC E that follows the rationale of the OS.
We are not abandoning a tradition merely for the sake of the economy, but we evaluate a tradition based on its original intention.

Hope this helps.

Regards,
Chris

Check out TWIN QUESTION here: https://gmatclub.com/forum/proposals-fo ... 14840.html

CherylPool,
Not getting the point. Can you please explain this...?

Thanks Chris,
I got choose D and of course, got it wrong.

From your explanation, I connect the dots (for others), this way:

Premise : Proposals for extending the United States school year to bring it more in line with its European and Japanese counterparts are often met with the objection that curtailing the schools’ three-month summer vacation would violate an established United States tradition dating from the nineteenth century.
Conclusion: However, this objection misses its mark.
Premise :True, in the nineteenth century the majority of schools closed for three months every summer, but only because they were in rural areas where successful harvests depended on children’s labor.
[color=#ed1c24]premise: reason behind Conclusion:[/color]If any policy could be justified by those appeals to tradition, it would be the policy of determining the length of the school year according to the needs of the economy.

In other words the argument is: The reasoning that 'If one has to NOT to violate tradition, one should NOT violate (should follow) the rationale/thought process/intent behind that tradition' is faulty.


Which one of the following principles, if accepted, would provide the strongest justification for the conclusion?


(A) That a given social policy has traditionally been in force justifies maintaining that policy only if doing so does not conflict with more pressing social needs.
<== Irrelevant to conclusion. Eliminate this option

(B) Appeals to its own traditions cannot excuse a country from the obligation to bring its practices in line with the legitimate expectations of the rest of the world.
<== Irrelevant to conclusion. Eliminate this option

(C) Because appeals to tradition often serve to mask the real interests at issue, such appeals should be disregarded.
<== Conclusion doesn't say, tradition masks actual reasoning or real interest,. Eliminate this option

(D) Traditional principles should be discarded when they no longer serve the needs of the economy.
<== This looks close to conclusion, however argument talks about relevance of intent and the needs of economy. children’s labor, if allowed, may still can contribute in successful harvest. Eliminate this option

(E) The actual tradition embodied in a given practice can be accurately identified only by reference to the reasons that originally prompted that practice.
==> Since we are left with only one option. This should be the answer. Moreover, one last validation - yes, this is conclusion restated.

nightblade354 AndrewN

Can you please share your analysis of option C, D and E. All seem close to me.

Proposals for extending the United States school year to bring it more in line with its European and Japanese counterparts are often met with the objection that curtailing the schools’ three-month summer vacation would violate an established United States tradition dating from the nineteenth century. However, this objection misses its mark. True, in the nineteenth century the majority of schools closed for three months every summer, but only because they were in rural areas where successful harvests depended on children’s labor. If any policy could be justified by those appeals to tradition, it would be the policy of determining the length of the school year according to the needs of the economy.

Which one of the following principles, if accepted, would provide the strongest justification for the conclusion?

(A) That a given social policy has traditionally been in force justifies maintaining that policy only if doing so does not conflict with more pressing social needs. - WRONG.

(B) Appeals to its own traditions cannot excuse a country from the obligation to bring its practices in line with the legitimate expectations of the rest of the world.

(C) Because appeals to tradition often serve to mask the real interests at issue, such appeals should be disregarded. - WRONG. Causality reversed.

(D) Traditional principles should be discarded when they no longer serve the needs of the economy. - WRONG. Strong language. No such conclusion can be inferred. It like discarding altogether which is not at all concluded in the passage.

(E) The actual tradition embodied in a given practice can be accurately identified only by reference to the reasons that originally prompted that practice. - CORRECT.

Although I chose A because i got confused by E - because of usage of 'only'. Also, E seems to be suggesting that identifying is the central issue of the passage. But I do realise - afterwards only - that 'more pressing needs' moulds the passage into another direction. And this what all the other 3 choices are more or less doing to passage.

Had that core issue in E not been suggested and 'only' word been not used, it would be the sure shot answer for me. But that's how it is.!!!

Answer E.

Here is a really good explanation on powerscore: https://www.manhattanprep.com/lsat/foru ... t1788.html

This is a very difficult question, so no shame in getting it wrong if you did! If this explanation is insufficient, I can write out how I would approach 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.