Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 14 Sep 2014, 20:25

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.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Scientists are sometimes said to assume that something is

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Posts: 131
Location: Ukraine, Kyiv
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 35 [0], given: 60

Scientists are sometimes said to assume that something is [#permalink] New post 27 Oct 2009, 23:58
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

10% (02:32) correct 90% (01:58) wrong based on 13 sessions
Scientists are sometimes said to assume that something is not the case until there is proof that it is the case. Now suppose the question arises whether a given food additive is safe. At that point, it would be neither known to be safe nor known not to be safe. By the characterization above, scientists would assume the additive not to be safe because it has not been proven safe. But they would also assume it to be safe because it has not been proven otherwise. But no scientist could assume without contradiction that a given substance is both safe and not safe: so this characterization of scientists is clearly wrong.

Which one of the following describes the technique of reasoning used above?

(A) A general statement is argued to be false by showing that it has deliberately been formulated to mislead.
(B) A statement is argued to be false by showing that taking it to be true leads to implausible consequences.
(C) A statement is shown to be false by showing that it directly contradicts a second statement that is taken to be true.
(D) A general statement is shown to be uninformative by showing that there are as many specific instances in which it is false as there are instances in which it is true.
(E) A statement is shown to be uninformative by showing that it supports no independently testable inferences.
_________________

Never, never, never give up

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 28 Jul 2009
Posts: 156
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 4

Re: scientists [#permalink] New post 28 Oct 2009, 00:26
barakhaiev wrote:
Scientists are sometimes said to assume that something is not the case until there is proof that it is the case. Now suppose the question arises whether a given food additive is safe. At that point, it would be neither known to be safe nor known not to be safe. By the characterization above, scientists would assume the additive not to be safe because it has not been proven safe. But they would also assume it to be safe because it has not been proven otherwise. But no scientist could assume without contradiction that a given substance is both safe and not safe: so this characterization of scientists is clearly wrong.

Which one of the following describes the technique of reasoning used above?

(A) A general statement is argued to be false by showing that it has deliberately been formulated to mislead.
(B) A statement is argued to be false by showing that taking it to be true leads to implausible consequences.
(C) A statement is shown to be false by showing that it directly contradicts a second statement that is taken to be true.
(D) A general statement is shown to be uninformative by showing that there are as many specific instances in which it is false as there are instances in which it is true.
(E) A statement is shown to be uninformative by showing that it supports no independently testable inferences.



Tricky one.
I think statement is shown to be false, not to be uninformative, since the last sentence states "is clearly wrong".
So, D & E are out.
C is also out since we have only one statement.
Between A & B, I gravitate to A. I believe it "has deliberately been formulated to mislead", rather than "leads to implausible consequences"

So, my ans is A.
Retired Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2009
Posts: 485
Location: Bangalore,India
WE 1: 4yrs in IT Industry
Followers: 21

Kudos [?]: 107 [0], given: 335

Re: scientists [#permalink] New post 28 Oct 2009, 00:51
No idea I Feel A&B are bit close
_________________

One Final Try.......

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 11 Aug 2009
Posts: 129
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 20 [0], given: 3

GMAT Tests User
Re: scientists [#permalink] New post 28 Oct 2009, 05:36
A?
Knewton GMAT Representative
User avatar
Affiliations: Knewton, Inc.
Joined: 27 Oct 2009
Posts: 15
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Re: scientists [#permalink] New post 28 Oct 2009, 06:07
This is a strange question. For a GMAT question, it comes across as very formal and strict, almost more like an LSAT question. We at Knewton believe that the answer to this question must be C. Here's our reasoning:

The statement at the beginning of the argument (1) is contradicted by the statement at the end (2), which is "taken to be true" based on the rest of the argument. The middle of the argument, which is more interesting and distracting, is only there to bolster the "truth" of (2), but the argument is designed to contradict (1):

1) Scientists are sometimes said to assume that something is not the case until there is proof that it is the case.
2) But no scientist could assume without contradiction that a given substance is both safe and not safe: so this characterization of scientists is clearly wrong.

Only choice C addresses this contradiction. The others all include "killer" words that overshoot the mark (capitalized below):

(A) A general statement is argued to be false by showing that it has DELIBERATELY been formulated to MISLEAD. (this argument does not claim that anyone is deliberately trying to mislead anyone else; this is far too extreme)
(B) A statement is argued to be false by showing that taking it to be true leads to IMPLAUSIBLE consequences. (implausible only means "difficult to believe," not "logically impossible." Everything else in this answer fits, but if this is the OA, then the question-writer must be unclear about the meaning of "implausible")
(C) A statement is shown to be false by showing that it directly contradicts a second statement that is taken to be true. (correct)
(D) A general statement is shown to be UNINFORMATIVE by showing that there are AS MANY specific instances in which it is false as there are instances in which it is true. (this choice does not address the conclusion of the argument, which is that a statement is "clearly wrong." Also, the relative number of cases in which the characterization is right or wrong is not mentioned.)
(E) A statement is shown to be UNINFORMATIVE by showing that it supports NO independently testable inferences. (again, not strong enough a word. We have no idea what is meant by "independently testable inferences" here, either, but the argument uses one example, so the word "no" is extreme as well.)

This is definitely a tricky question. An important factor to remember on such questions is that the argument does not have to be logically solid for the "method of reasoning" to be identified. This argument is pretty wacky, but the arguer still points out a direct contradiction to prove a statement "false," so C is the best answer. Watch for killer words!

Alex
Knewton Verbal Developer
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 437
Schools: UT at Austin, Indiana State University, UC at Berkeley
WE 1: 5.5
WE 2: 5.5
WE 3: 6.0
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 48 [0], given: 16

GMAT Tests User
Re: scientists [#permalink] New post 28 Oct 2009, 16:18
First I thought the OA is D.
But upon reading the Knewton's response, I realized the word uniformative does not make any sense.
But I am still hesitant to pick C, as the Knewton Developer argues for.
If I were to choose right now, I would go with B
It looks to me as the best available option.
_________________

Never give up,,,

Expert Post
SVP
SVP
avatar
Status: Graduated
Affiliations: HEC
Joined: 28 Sep 2009
Posts: 1638
Concentration: Economics, Finance
GMAT 1: 730 Q48 V44
Followers: 85

Kudos [?]: 480 [0], given: 432

GMAT Tests User Premium Member
Re: scientists [#permalink] New post 13 Nov 2009, 17:16
Expert's post
This is a strange question. I really wasn't sure what to make of it. The KnewtonAlex's post convinces me, I think.
_________________

Get the best GMAT Prep Resources with GMAT Club Premium Membership

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 08 Jun 2008
Posts: 11
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 2

Re: scientists [#permalink] New post 18 Jun 2010, 01:37
I go for B
Because: "is clearly wrong" shows the scientists' statement is false --> elimilate D & E.
C is elimilated because there're no second statement that is contradicted
Then, consider A & B:
- I found no midleading reasoning here --> elimilate B
- "a given substance is both safe and not safe" is an implausible consequence --> B is right
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 1474
Schools: Wharton (R2 - submitted); HBS (R2 - submitted); IIMA (admitted for 1 year PGPX)
Followers: 15

Kudos [?]: 98 [0], given: 13

GMAT Tests User
Re: scientists [#permalink] New post 02 Jul 2010, 09:45
I too second B (2:18). There is indeed no second statement here as C suggests. A certain characterization of scientists is held on the basis of a certain characteristic particular them. That characteristic is applied to a particular situation which is then shown to lead to an implausible conclusion. Using this the characterization of scientists is disputed.
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 1474
Schools: Wharton (R2 - submitted); HBS (R2 - submitted); IIMA (admitted for 1 year PGPX)
Followers: 15

Kudos [?]: 98 [0], given: 13

GMAT Tests User
Re: scientists [#permalink] New post 02 Jul 2010, 09:53
I recant my earlier position... C must be the right answer. Also agree on the point made by Knewton on the usage of implausible. I should have been more careful!
Re: scientists   [#permalink] 02 Jul 2010, 09:53
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Scientists are sometimes said to assume that something is mymba99 6 16 Apr 2008, 10:53
Scientists are sometimes said to assume that something is jyotsnasarabu 7 22 Nov 2006, 11:02
Scientists are sometimes said to assume that something is rahulraao 8 11 Oct 2005, 16:26
Scientists are sometimes said to assume that something is WinWinMBA 5 26 May 2005, 11:05
Scientists are sometimes said to assume that something is sonaketu 4 29 Apr 2005, 07:16
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Scientists are sometimes said to assume that something is

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


cron

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.