|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 11 Jul 2010
Posts: 233
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
30
[0], given: 20
|
"Therefore, if Gina refrains from gambling she will also avoid being penniless. The refraining is not compulsary to be penniless.It's just one possibility." ---> i don't completely agree with that jaxis
If she refrains (by copying Robert's behavior) ---> she WILL avoid being penniless; this implies that if she does not refrain then she will NOT avoid, i.e., she will be penniless, else using the word "avoid" here would not make sense. Also note that it says "will also avoid", not "may" avoid. Thus refraining is 'compulsory' as you put it.
That is the flawed argument and I agree with Tommy's analysis of this above
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manhattan GMAT Instructor
Affiliations: ManhattanGMAT
Joined: 21 Jan 2010
Posts: 354
Location: San Francisco
Followers: 239
Kudos [?]:
419
[0], given: 11
|
Hey All, Hmm. I hear people's points, but I still disagree. The problem, as I see it, with D, is that it does not involve two separate entities, which is the whole point. Instead, it discusses a general concept. But the main subject is extrapolating out from one company to make a conclusion about another company. In A, a conclusion is extrapolated out from one person to another. In D, there is simply an idea, which is then generalized. I truly don't think this works. If you want to blame the question, you can do that, but I would stand by A as a better choice than D. -t
_________________
Tommy Wallach | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | San Francisco
Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Reviews
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 07 Sep 2010
Posts: 9
GMAT 1: 730 Q50 V38
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 2
|
@ gmat1011 :
You are missing the point mate.
He says "if Gina refrains from gambling she will also avoid being penniless".
We means refraining is one of the causes(not the only cause so refraining is not compulsary here to avoind being penniless)
@ Tom :
Had everything been same between A and D, I would have agreed with the entity comparision concept provided .
But its not case. There is a clear logic of flaw that The question statement shares with D.
I would compare the logic between question and answer choice first, only then the in the next level of comparision i would consider the objects being compared.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 16 Jul 2010
Posts: 163
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
9
[0], given: 0
|
I'd go by Tommy's logic any day. It doesn't seem plausible that the OA is D.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Sep 2009
Posts: 396
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Schools: ROSS PT 2012
WE 1: Mech Engineer - General Electric - 2yrs
WE 2: Lead Mech Engineer - Ingersoll Rand - 4 yrs
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
17
[0], given: 5
|
A,
Agree with Tommy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
SVP
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 1635
Schools: CBS
WE 1: 4 years (Consulting)
Followers: 25
Kudos [?]:
119
[0], given: 2
|
+1 for A.
_________________
The sky is the limit
800 is the limit
Find out what's new at GMAT Club - latest features and updates
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
