Last visit was: 26 Apr 2024, 14:23 It is currently 26 Apr 2024, 14:23

Close
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
Your Progress

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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
SORT BY:
Date
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 92948
Own Kudos [?]: 619230 [6]
Given Kudos: 81609
Send PM
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 92948
Own Kudos [?]: 619230 [0]
Given Kudos: 81609
Send PM
User avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 25 May 2014
Posts: 43
Own Kudos [?]: 46 [0]
Given Kudos: 125
Send PM
avatar
Manager
Manager
Joined: 27 Oct 2013
Posts: 176
Own Kudos [?]: 225 [1]
Given Kudos: 79
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Technology
GMAT Date: 03-02-2015
GPA: 3.88
Send PM
Re: V05-03 [#permalink]
1
Kudos
I was also confused between B and E, and initially picked B as an answer because of the same reason mentioned in the post by Ankur9.


However, this is my second thought -

Suspicious packages are indistinguishable from all other kinds of package. -> This means all the packages look similar and it's hard to distinguish a package from a suspicious package (Hold it here)


Option E states 'Postal employees desire to open packages out of curiosity.'

Here is the catch now -> If postal employees do not desire to open packages out of curiosity, do you think they will open suspicious package???

No right, because they don't desire to open packages out of curiosity.

Please correct me if I am wrong.
Intern
Intern
Joined: 08 Jan 2015
Posts: 48
Own Kudos [?]: 52 [0]
Given Kudos: 53
Send PM
Re: V05-03 [#permalink]
I agree with DesiGmat. Without curiosity they will not open any of them at all. At the same time, even if the are able to distinguish suspicious from not suspicious but have curiosity they will open them.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Posts: 261
Own Kudos [?]: 88 [0]
Given Kudos: 233
Location: India
Concentration: Social Entrepreneurship, General Management
GMAT 1: 690 Q49 V34
GMAT 2: 720 Q49 V39
GPA: 2.8
Send PM
Re: V05-03 [#permalink]
I am not able to eliminate option B here.
Experts any thoughts here?
chetan2u
CR Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2413
Own Kudos [?]: 15266 [0]
Given Kudos: 26
Location: Germany
Schools:
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE:Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Send PM
Re: V05-03 [#permalink]
Expert Reply
goforgmat wrote:
I am not able to eliminate option B here.
Experts any thoughts here?
chetan2u


You are trapped by the reverse logic. The passage assumes that the the suspicious packages are DISTINGUISHABLE from normal packages - that is why the statement: "If individual employees are allowed to open “suspicious” packages without first following a strict protocol.... ".

However to arrive at the conclusion, it does not matter whether the suspicious packages are distinguishable - if the employees are curious, they will open all packages (distinction does not matter in that case - employees may categorize all packages as "suspicious" depending on their own discretion).
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 27 Aug 2016
Posts: 22
Own Kudos [?]: 9 [0]
Given Kudos: 12
Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Marketing
GPA: 3.87
WE:Sales (Internet and New Media)
Send PM
Re: V05-03 [#permalink]
I think this is a high-quality question and the explanation isn't clear enough, please elaborate. I do not follow the explanation,please elaborate
I marked option D because according to the argument
"If individual employees are allowed to open “suspicious” packages without first following a strict protocol"IMPLIES
that there is no strict protocol to follow for opening/inspecting a package in the first place,
Hence IMO option D is an assumption on which the conclusion relies more than the reason for opening a package as suggested by option E.
Please correct me if my reasoning is wrong.
Thanks in advance
CR Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2413
Own Kudos [?]: 15266 [0]
Given Kudos: 26
Location: Germany
Schools:
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE:Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Send PM
Re: V05-03 [#permalink]
Expert Reply
karanchamp1 wrote:
I think this is a high-quality question and the explanation isn't clear enough, please elaborate. I do not follow the explanation,please elaborate
I marked option D because according to the argument
"If individual employees are allowed to open “suspicious” packages without first following a strict protocol"IMPLIES
that there is no strict protocol to follow for opening/inspecting a package in the first place,
Hence IMO option D is an assumption on which the conclusion relies more than the reason for opening a package as suggested by option E.
Please correct me if my reasoning is wrong.
Thanks in advance


It is not assumed that no protocol exists at all. The passage states about requirement of "strict protocol". This may as well imply that there is a current protocol that is not strict enough.
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 27 Aug 2016
Posts: 22
Own Kudos [?]: 9 [0]
Given Kudos: 12
Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Marketing
GPA: 3.87
WE:Sales (Internet and New Media)
Send PM
Re: V05-03 [#permalink]
sayantanc2k wrote:
karanchamp1 wrote:
I think this is a high-quality question and the explanation isn't clear enough, please elaborate. I do not follow the explanation,please elaborate
I marked option D because according to the argument
"If individual employees are allowed to open “suspicious” packages without first following a strict protocol"IMPLIES
that there is no strict protocol to follow for opening/inspecting a package in the first place,
Hence IMO option D is an assumption on which the conclusion relies more than the reason for opening a package as suggested by option E.
Please correct me if my reasoning is wrong.
Thanks in advance


It is not assumed that no protocol exists at all. The passage states about requirement of "strict protocol". This may as well imply that there is a current protocol that is not strict enough.


But how does that make option E a better choice??
Consider my line of thought
I used negation test on the two best choices i came down to D and E
so option D says there is no protocol to follow
and option E says that employees DO NOT open packages out of idle curiosity( :roll: )
so suppose there is no protocol to follow than does it matter why an employee checked a parcel
furthermore in BUNUEL's explanation for option D
"The passage does not support this claim."
an assumption is not supported by an argument its the HIDDEN LINK between the premise and conclusion right?
so how do i proceed??
CR Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2413
Own Kudos [?]: 15266 [1]
Given Kudos: 26
Location: Germany
Schools:
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE:Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Send PM
Re: V05-03 [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
karanchamp1 wrote:
sayantanc2k wrote:
karanchamp1 wrote:
I think this is a high-quality question and the explanation isn't clear enough, please elaborate. I do not follow the explanation,please elaborate
I marked option D because according to the argument
"If individual employees are allowed to open “suspicious” packages without first following a strict protocol"IMPLIES
that there is no strict protocol to follow for opening/inspecting a package in the first place,
Hence IMO option D is an assumption on which the conclusion relies more than the reason for opening a package as suggested by option E.
Please correct me if my reasoning is wrong.
Thanks in advance


It is not assumed that no protocol exists at all. The passage states about requirement of "strict protocol". This may as well imply that there is a current protocol that is not strict enough.


But how does that make option E a better choice??
Consider my line of thought
I used negation test on the two best choices i came down to D and E
so option D says there is no protocol to follow
and option E says that employees DO NOT open packages out of idle curiosity( :roll: )
so suppose there is no protocol to follow than does it matter why an employee checked a parcel
furthermore in BUNUEL's explanation for option D
"The passage does not support this claim."
an assumption is not supported by an argument its the HIDDEN LINK between the premise and conclusion right?
so how do i proceed??


Option E states: "Postal employees desire to open packages out of curiosity." If they did not do that , then there would be no requirement for stricter protocol. Thus negating option E breaks the argument.

Option D: Already explained in the previous post. "No protocol" is not a mandatory assumption.

The OE for option D is changed.
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 27 Aug 2016
Posts: 22
Own Kudos [?]: 9 [0]
Given Kudos: 12
Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Marketing
GPA: 3.87
WE:Sales (Internet and New Media)
Send PM
Re: V05-03 [#permalink]
sayantanc2k wrote:
Option E states: "Postal employees desire to open packages out of curiosity." If they did not do that , then there would be no requirement for stricter protocol. Thus negating option E breaks the argument.

Option D: Already explained in the previous post. "No protocol" is not a mandatory assumption.

The OE for option D is changed.

sayantanc2k thanks for taking the pain man,sometimes I just don't get it in one go :lol:
Kudos!!!!!!!
Intern
Intern
Joined: 06 Jun 2017
Posts: 8
Own Kudos [?]: 3 [0]
Given Kudos: 53
Location: India
GMAT 1: 610 Q49 V25
GMAT 2: 720 Q49 V38
GPA: 2.9
Send PM
Re: V05-03 [#permalink]
going the fact the negation of the statement must invalidate the passage - Choice B does that. cos if suspicious packages are different looking - then its easy to mandate workers to open only those packets. Its because all packets look alike we have a problem. Also - the question states "desire" - its not just becasue of desire - its just curiosity !! HENCE - its either a poor quality question or the negation logic works for 2 options. - thoughts ?
Intern
Intern
Joined: 29 Mar 2017
Posts: 5
Own Kudos [?]: 10 [0]
Given Kudos: 15
Location: Turkey
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
GMAT 1: 670 Q50 V30
GPA: 3.11
WE:Marketing (Consumer Electronics)
Send PM
Re: V05-03 [#permalink]
How can we be totally sure that postal employees desire to open packages out of curiosity? Doesn't choice E imply that all postal emloyees desire to open packages? The argument only and only talks about "some postal employees". Since an assumption must be incontestable, choice E cannot be the answer either.

Correct me if I am wrong please.
DI Forum Moderator
Joined: 05 May 2019
Status:GMAT Club Team member
Affiliations: GMAT Club
Posts: 1030
Own Kudos [?]: 639 [0]
Given Kudos: 1003
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1:
645 Q82 V81 DI82
GMAT 1: 430 Q31 V19
GMAT 2: 570 Q44 V25
GMAT 3: 660 Q48 V33
GPA: 3.26
WE:Engineering (Manufacturing)
Send PM
Re V05-03 [#permalink]
I think this is a high-quality question and I agree with explanation.
GMAT Club Bot
Re V05-03 [#permalink]
Moderator:
Math Expert
92948 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne