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

It is currently 22 Oct 2014, 21:20

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

The fire that destroyed the Municipal Building started

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 11 Apr 2009
Posts: 169
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 5

The fire that destroyed the Municipal Building started [#permalink] New post 23 Apr 2010, 11:32
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

66% (02:01) correct 34% (01:26) wrong based on 120 sessions
The fire that destroyed the Municipal Building started before dawn this morning, and the last fire fighters did not leave until late this afternoon. No one could have been anywhere in the vicinity of a fire like that one and fail to notice it. Thomas must have seen it, whatever he now says to the contrary. He admits that, as usual, he went from his apartment to the library this morning, and there is no way for him to get from his apartment to the library without going past the Municipal Building.

The main conclusion of the argument is that
(A) Thomas was in the vicinity of the fire this morning
(B) Thomas claimed not to have seen the fire
(C) Thomas saw the fire this morning
(D) Thomas went directly from his apartment to the library this morning
(E) Thomas went by the Municipal Building this morning

I am really confused between B and C. Can anyone specifically explain B and C options?
Thanks
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 01 Feb 2010
Posts: 25
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Schools: McGill, HEC, Concordia
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 2

Re: 1000 CR: Main point [#permalink] New post 23 Apr 2010, 11:43
B is the claim that the passage is refuting. C is the conclusion refuting that claim.

Essentially what the passage is saying is this:
1. It's impossible to have walked by and not seen the fire.
2. Thomas claims to have not seen the fire.
3. Thomas walked by the fire.
4. Thomas must have seen the fire.

4 is the conclusion.

Cheers,
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Oct 2009
Posts: 203
Concentration: General Management, Sustainability
WE: Consulting (Computer Software)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 12

Re: 1000 CR: Main point [#permalink] New post 23 Apr 2010, 11:48
I am also confused with B and C options.

The passage says "No one could have been anywhere in the vicinity of a fire like that one and fail to notice it"
and then tries to establish a connection " He admits that, as usual, he went from his apartment to the library this morning, and there is no way for him to get from his apartment to the library without going past the Municipal Building."

I feel C is the correct option. The main point of this passage is to say that Thomas saw the fire this morning.
_________________

+1Kudos, if this helps

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 11 Apr 2009
Posts: 169
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 5

Re: 1000 CR: Main point [#permalink] New post 23 Apr 2010, 12:24
Thanks he4dhuntr....nicely explained. This was my reasoning which is wrong but in 'conclusion' questions. I took the conclusion as : 'Thomas must have seen it, whatever he now says to the contrary' and hence thought that he 'must have seen it' and not 'surely seen the fire' and hence 'Thomas claiming that he did not see it' sounded more right at the moment becoz of the phrase ' says to the contrary'.
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Posts: 956
WE 1: 3.5 yrs IT
WE 2: 2.5 yrs Retail chain
Followers: 55

Kudos [?]: 733 [0], given: 40

Re: 1000 CR: Main point [#permalink] New post 24 Apr 2010, 00:43
IMO C.
It's a case of misplaced conclusion. Let's break the argument to locate the conclusion:

Premise 1: The fire that destroyed the Municipal Building started before dawn this morning, and the last fire fighters did not leave until late this afternoon.
[This is a fact]
Premise 2: No one could have been anywhere in the vicinity of a fire like that one and fail to notice it. [This is again a fact]

Conclusion: Thomas must have seen it, whatever he now says to the contrary. [This should be the conclusion as supported by the following premise. He could say anything only after his trip from apratment to liabrary]

Premise 3: He admits that, as usual, he went from his apartment to the library this morning, and there is no way for him to get from his apartment to the library without going past the Municipal Building. [This is again a fact]

So, the argument would be like:
The fire that destroyed the Municipal Building started before dawn this morning, and the last fire fighters did not leave until late this afternoon. No one could have been anywhere in the vicinity of a fire like that one and fail to notice it. Thomas admits that, as usual, he went from his apartment to the library this morning, and there is no way for him to get from his apartment to the library without going past the Municipal Building. Thomas must have seen it, whatever he now says to the contrary.

gmatprep09 wrote:
The fire that destroyed the Municipal Building started before dawn this morning, and the last fire fighters did not leave until late this afternoon. No one could have been anywhere in the vicinity of a fire like that one and fail to notice it. Thomas must have seen it, whatever he now says to the contrary. He admits that, as usual, he went from his apartment to the library this morning, and there is no way for him to get from his apartment to the library without going past the Municipal Building.

The main conclusion of the argument is that
(A) Thomas was in the vicinity of the fire this morning [He may have crossed the vicinity before the fire broke. Incorrect]
(B) Thomas claimed not to have seen the fire [We dont know what he said as contrary. Incorrect]
(C) Thomas saw the fire this morning [Correct]
(D) Thomas went directly from his apartment to the library this morning [This is just a stated premise. Incorrect]
(E) Thomas went by the Municipal Building this morning [This is just a stated premise. Incorrect]

I am really confused between B and C. Can anyone specifically explain B and C options?
Thanks

_________________

Want to improve your CR: cr-methods-an-approach-to-find-the-best-answers-93146.html
Tricky Quant problems: 50-tricky-questions-92834.html
Important Grammer Fundamentals: key-fundamentals-of-grammer-our-crucial-learnings-on-sc-93659.html

Retired Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2009
Posts: 486
Location: Bangalore,India
WE 1: 4yrs in IT Industry
Followers: 22

Kudos [?]: 112 [0], given: 337

Re: 1000 CR: Main point [#permalink] New post 24 Apr 2010, 01:35
Feel its C
_________________

One Final Try.......

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 24 Dec 2009
Posts: 227
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 3

Re: 1000 CR: Main point [#permalink] New post 21 Jun 2010, 10:01
It should be C. The conclusion is - He must have seen the fire.

OA please. Thank You.

Thanks,
Akhil M.Parekh
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 25 Feb 2010
Posts: 459
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 36 [0], given: 5

Re: 1000 CR: Main point [#permalink] New post 24 Jun 2010, 13:57
It has to be C
_________________

GGG (Gym / GMAT / Girl) -- Be Serious

Its your duty to post OA afterwards; some one must be waiting for that...

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 24 Jan 2010
Posts: 164
Location: India
Schools: ISB
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 24 [0], given: 14

Re: 1000 CR: Main point [#permalink] New post 13 Jul 2010, 00:52
+1 vote for C. What is the OA?
_________________

_________________
If you like my post, consider giving me a kudos. THANKS!

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Status: mba here i come!
Joined: 07 Aug 2011
Posts: 271
Location: Pakistan
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
Schools: Insead '13 (M)
GMAT 1: 680 Q46 V37
GMAT 2: Q V
Followers: 24

Kudos [?]: 721 [0], given: 48

GMAT ToolKit User
Re: The fire that destroyed the Municipal Building started [#permalink] New post 01 Mar 2012, 13:09
conclusion: Thomas must have seen it, whatever he now says to the contrary.

ans: c
_________________

press +1 Kudos to appreciate posts
Download Valuable Collection of Percentage Questions (PS/DS)

Retired Moderator
User avatar
Status: 2000 posts! I don't know whether I should feel great or sad about it! LOL
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 1726
Location: Peru
Schools: Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, MIT & HKS (Government)
WE 1: Economic research
WE 2: Banking
WE 3: Government: Foreign Trade and SMEs
Followers: 67

Kudos [?]: 330 [0], given: 109

Re: The fire that destroyed the Municipal Building started [#permalink] New post 01 Mar 2012, 17:24
+1 C

That's the main point of the argument. That's what the author wants to show.
_________________

"Life’s battle doesn’t always go to stronger or faster men; but sooner or later the man who wins is the one who thinks he can."

My Integrated Reasoning Logbook / Diary: my-ir-logbook-diary-133264.html

Get the best GMAT Prep Resources with GMAT Club Premium Membership

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 07 Dec 2011
Posts: 174
Location: India
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 32 [0], given: 24

Re: The fire that destroyed the Municipal Building started [#permalink] New post 02 Mar 2012, 06:23
Definitely C. B is not a conclusion. It is just a fact that has already been stated in the premises..
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Posts: 914
Concentration: General Management, General Management
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V32
GPA: 3.7
Followers: 13

Kudos [?]: 239 [0], given: 318

Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: The fire that destroyed the Municipal Building started [#permalink] New post 14 Jan 2013, 21:40
Thomas must have seen it, whatever he now says to the contrary.
(B) Thomas claimed not to have seen the fire (Accepted that this is stated in the premise)
(C) Thomas saw the fire this morning

Considering C as a conclusion calls for more than one assumption(means outside information) ,which we can't afford to have in conclusion based questions.
Moreover, C says that Thomas saw fire this morning:

Assumptions:

(1). Timing of thomas going by his usual way may be such that by that time there wasn't any significant fire to notice.
(2). By the time he crossed the municipal building he could have got a call from his wife,and he did not notice the fire.
(3). Thomas left early at dawn and was not in his consciousness , so whatever he found he blamed his unconsciousness for that.
More are there ...............

Plz explain why (C).

Rgds,
Saurabh
_________________

Rgds,
TGC!
_____________________________________________________________________
I Assisted You => KUDOS Please
_____________________________________________________________________________

GMAT Pill Representative
User avatar
Joined: 07 Nov 2012
Posts: 346
Schools: LBS '14 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q48 V48
Followers: 140

Kudos [?]: 186 [0], given: 4

Re: The fire that destroyed the Municipal Building started [#permalink] New post 15 Jan 2013, 08:06
Hi Target,

I'd have 2 points to think about here:

1) We are asked for the conclusion of the argument - not for a categoric fact. It is clear that the person writing this passage is trying to set up a conclusion that T must have seen the fire.

2) To look at your assumptions, some of them seem a little far fetched. Whilst I agree that we should look for alternatives, we must also be reasonable. I don't think you'd miss an inferno, just because you were on the phone, nor do I think 'sleep walking' or whatever you mean by being 'unconscious' is plausible.

I'm happy with C
_________________

Former GMAT Pill student, now on staff. Used GMATPILL OG 12 and nothing else: 770 (48,48) & 6.0



... and more

Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Posts: 914
Concentration: General Management, General Management
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V32
GPA: 3.7
Followers: 13

Kudos [?]: 239 [0], given: 318

Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: The fire that destroyed the Municipal Building started [#permalink] New post 15 Jan 2013, 09:02
plumber250 wrote:
Hi Target,

I'd have 2 points to think about here:

1) We are asked for the conclusion of the argument - not for a categoric fact. It is clear that the person writing this passage is trying to set up a conclusion that T must have seen the fire.

True ,but we have to look clarify that aren't we making assumptions just to draw a conclusion forcefully.

2) To look at your assumptions, some of them seem a little far fetched. Whilst I agree that we should look for alternatives, we must also be reasonable. I don't think you'd miss an inferno, just because you were on the phone, nor do I think 'sleep walking' or whatever you mean by being 'unconscious' is plausible.

That is why I added "More are there............"

I'm happy with C


Despite explanation,I am not convinced !!!!

Rgds,
Saurabh
_________________

Rgds,
TGC!
_____________________________________________________________________
I Assisted You => KUDOS Please
_____________________________________________________________________________

Expert Post
Current Student
User avatar
Status: Making every effort to create original content for you!!
Joined: 23 Dec 2010
Posts: 490
Location: United States
Concentration: Healthcare, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 660 Q48 V34
GMAT 2: 750 Q49 V42
Followers: 257

Kudos [?]: 991 [0], given: 82

GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member
Re: The fire that destroyed the Municipal Building started [#permalink] New post 18 Jan 2013, 03:29
Expert's post
Hi Saurabh,

In the conclusion questions the correct answer choice must be true and must logically follow from the stimulus. Incorrect answer choices in such questions are the ones which could be true and not necessarily true. So we have to find the choice which must be true.

The main conclusion of the argument is that
(A) Thomas was in the vicinity of the fire this morning -- Not definitely true from the passage. He could have passed the fire, but not not necessarily being in the vicinity

(B) Thomas claimed not to have seen the fire -- He admits that he went from appt to library, but not that he has not seen the fire, so not necessarily true

(C) Thomas saw the fire this morning -- Yes, this must be true because Thomas can't go to library without passing the building and If he went past the building he must have seen the fire. Therefore this option must be true

(D) Thomas went directly from his apartment to the library this morning -- Thomas went to the library, that's for sure but we cant be sure of "directly"

(E) Thomas went by the Municipal Building this morning -- Thomas went past the Municipal building, "went by" we can't be sure of..

The stimulus says "if someone passes the building he/she will see the fire" you have to take this as true. To state it simply, if you pass the building you will see the fire, even if your wife calls or you are sleep walking (you will still see, however you may not be able to recall; but see the fire, you will.) The statement of seeing the fire is definitely true, so the answer choice (C) is unequivocally true.

In most (almost all) of the GMAT questions if is much easier to POE the choices than to figure out why the correct answer is correct. However in our question above the correct answer is quite clear.

Hope it helps

Vercules
_________________

Press Kudos if you want to say thanks

Ultimate Reading Comprehension Encyclopedia | Ultimate Sentence Correction Encyclopedia | GMAT Prep Software Analysis and What If Scenarios -- VERBAL | GMAT Prep Software Analysis and What If Scenarios -- IR

Please Read and Follow the 9 Rules of Posting in Verbal Forum

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 24 Apr 2013
Posts: 75
Location: United States
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 23

Re: The fire that destroyed the Municipal Building started [#permalink] New post 10 Sep 2013, 03:44
I would argue for A
(A) Thomas was in the vicinity of the fire this morning.
Why? well, it is tempting to choose C. But I think is more of an inference.
We infer from the passage that (I) Thomas is lying and (ii) Thomas has seen the fire. Inference by definition is something we understand from the passage without being explicitly stated. If we add those 2 inferences up, we reach the conclusion that he must have been in the vicinity of the fire, hence he must have seen it.

If anybody can better define conclusion and inferences regarding this passage, please do so and explain how can we clearly define.
_________________

Struggling: make or break attempt

Re: The fire that destroyed the Municipal Building started   [#permalink] 10 Sep 2013, 03:44
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
The fire that destroyed the Municipal Building tuanquang269 3 29 Jul 2014, 07:42
Some buildings that were destroyed and heavily damaged in misterJJ2u 4 02 Aug 2007, 21:19
Some buildings that were destroyed and heavily damaged in alimad 4 30 Jul 2007, 11:20
Some buildings that were destroyed and heavily damaged in rahulraao 5 21 Sep 2005, 01:26
The fire that destroyed the Municipal Building started WinWinMBA 10 07 Jun 2005, 16:07
Display posts from previous: Sort by

The fire that destroyed the Municipal Building started

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


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®.