|
Author |
Message |
|
TAGS:
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 12 Jun 2009
Posts: 15
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
Whenever she considers voting in an election to select one [#permalink]
 02 Sep 2009, 07:17
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
100% (02:35) wrong based on 1 sessions
Whenever she considers voting in an election to select one candidate for a position and there is at least one issue important to her, Kay uses the following principle in choosing which course of action to take: it is acceptable for me to vote for a candidate whose opinions differ from mine on at least one issue important to me whenever I disagree with each of the other candidates on even more such issues; it is otherwise unacceptable to vote for that candidate. In the upcoming mayoral election, the three candidates are Legrand, Medina, and Norton. There is only one issue important to Kay, and only Medina shares her opinion on that issue.
According to the principle stated in the passage, in the upcoming mayoral election
(A) it is acceptable for Kay to vote for either Medina or Legrand, but it is unacceptable for her to vote for Norton
(B) the only unacceptable courses of action are for Kay to vote for Norton and for her to vote for Legrand
(C) it is unacceptable for Kay to vote for any of the candidates
(D) the only unacceptable course of action is for Kay to vote for Medina
(E) it is acceptable for Kay to vote for any of the candidates
plz explain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 15 Mar 2008
Posts: 51
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
9
[0], given: 0
|
B should be the answer.
Since only 1 issue is important to Kay and Medina is the only one who shares that issue, Medina differs with Kay on 0 issues. On the other hand, the othe 2 individuals differ with Medina on 1 issue. Therefore, it is unacceptable for Kay to vote for the other 2 candidates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 16 Apr 2009
Posts: 349
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
24
[0], given: 10
|
I am confused , what is the source of this question?
_________________
Always tag your question
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 17 Jul 2009
Posts: 305
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
20
[0], given: 6
|
D she only stated that she can vote for candidate that has at least one opinion differs from her...so Medina is out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 26 Jul 2009
Posts: 359
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
18
[0], given: 32
|
sprtng wrote: D she only stated that she can vote for candidate that has at least one opinion differs from her...so Medina is out. Agree. 'D' it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 15 Jan 2008
Posts: 57
Followers: 1
Kudos [?]:
4
[0], given: 1
|
C for me, ggmatt wrote: Whenever she considers voting in an election to select one candidate for a position and there is at least one issue important to her, Kay uses the following principle in choosing which course of action to take: it is acceptable for me to vote for a candidate whose opinions differ from mine on at least one issue important to me whenever I disagree with each of the other candidates on even more such issues; it is otherwise unacceptable to vote for that candidate.......... There is only one issue important to Kay, and only Medina shares her opinion on that issue. First of all, In order to select one candidate, it have to at least one issue. Then this issue differ from her mind. Although Medina shares opinion, we do not know if the issue differ from Kay's mind or not. So it is unacceptable for Kay to vote for any of the candidates
_________________
Remember to give kudos if it's useful for you !!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 01 Jan 2009
Posts: 31
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
2
[0], given: 1
|
IMO C.
Reason : The statement says "it is acceptable for me to vote for a candidate whose opinions differ from mine on at least one issue important to me whenever I disagree with each of the other candidates on even more such issues; it is otherwise unacceptable to vote for that candidate"
So, basically, there must be at least 3 issues important to her to decide whom she wants to vote for.
But, in this election, there is only 1 issue important to her; so , she should not vote for anybody.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Joined: 28 Jul 2009
Posts: 156
Followers: 3
Kudos [?]:
12
[0], given: 4
|
ggmatt wrote: Whenever she considers voting in an election to select one candidate for a position and there is at least one issue important to her, Kay uses the following principle in choosing which course of action to take: it is acceptable for me to vote for a candidate whose opinions differ from mine on at least one issue important to me whenever I disagree with each of the other candidates on even more such issues; it is otherwise unacceptable to vote for that candidate. In the upcoming mayoral election, the three candidates are Legrand, Medina, and Norton. There is only one issue important to Kay, and only Medina shares her opinion on that issue.
According to the principle stated in the passage, in the upcoming mayoral election
(A) it is acceptable for Kay to vote for either Medina or Legrand, but it is unacceptable for her to vote for Norton
(B) the only unacceptable courses of action are for Kay to vote for Norton and for her to vote for Legrand
(C) it is unacceptable for Kay to vote for any of the candidates
(D) the only unacceptable course of action is for Kay to vote for Medina
(E) it is acceptable for Kay to vote for any of the candidates
plz explain No strict logic here! I guess the source is not very good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 04 May 2012
Posts: 4
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
Re: Whenever she considers voting in an election to select one [#permalink]
29 May 2012, 13:33
This question is from preptest 26, section 3, number 23.
The OA is B. Below is my reasoning
1) The stimulus states that it is acceptable to vote for a candidate whose opinions differ on at least on issue that is important whenever Kay disagrees with each of the other candidates on even more such issues.
2) There is only one important issue and only Medina shares her opinion.
Therefore, Legrand and Nortan does not share Kay's opinion on the important issue. This means that it is unacceptable to vote for Legrand or Nortan because they both disagree with her on 1 important issue while Medina disagrees with her on 0 important issues.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Verbal GMAT Forum Moderator
Status: Flying over the cloud!
Joined: 17 Aug 2011
Posts: 787
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: International Business, Finance
GPA: 3.07
Followers: 18
Kudos [?]:
80
[0], given: 35
|
Re: Whenever she considers voting in an election to select one [#permalink]
30 May 2012, 00:54
This is the LSAT question, I am still confused between B and D. Can anyone help me explain
_________________
Rules for posting in verbal gmat forum, read it before posting anything in verbal forum
Giving me + 1 kudos if my post is valuable with you 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 05 Apr 2012
Posts: 24
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
1
[0], given: 12
|
Re: Whenever she considers voting in an election to select one [#permalink]
30 May 2012, 04:11
I think it is B. When Norton and Degrand did not have any issue, no chance for kay to consider them. Also Medina has a issue and she has atleast 50% chance to disagree with kay's opinion. So option C cannot be the answer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Intern
Joined: 04 May 2012
Posts: 4
Followers: 0
Kudos [?]:
0
[0], given: 0
|
Re: Whenever she considers voting in an election to select one [#permalink]
30 May 2012, 06:06
(B) and (D) are somewhat opposites in their answers so it is important to go back and understand the stimulus first. I will see if I can try and explain the stimulus better.
When choosing a candidate, Kay uses the criteria of "important" issues. In this particular case, there is only one important issue to Kay. The principle that the stimulus states is about a world where there is no single candidate that agrees 100% on Kay's important issues. In this world, it is acceptable to then pick a candidate where Kay disagrees with less on an important issue than others. Therefore, the only scenarios where it is unacceptable to vote for any candidates is when she disagrees with everyone equally or there is another candidate where she disagrees with less.
In this particular case, Medina disagrees with her on 0 issues (the optimal scenario for Kay), Legrand and Nortan disagrees with her on 1 issue. Therefore, we know that from the principle stated in the stimulus, it is unacceptable to vote for Legrand and Nortan. However, it is acceptable to vote for Medina, that's why (D) is wrong.
Does that clarify between (B) and (D)?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manager
Affiliations: Project Management Professional (PMP)
Joined: 30 Jun 2011
Posts: 215
Location: New Delhi, India
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
9
[0], given: 12
|
Re: Whenever she considers voting in an election to select one [#permalink]
02 Jun 2012, 22:12
Good question, was confused between B and D. Now seems fine. Posted from my mobile device 
_________________
Best
Vaibhav
If you found my contribution helpful, please click the +1 Kudos button on the left, Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Nov 2009
Posts: 314
Followers: 2
Kudos [?]:
32
[0], given: 20
|
Re: Whenever she considers voting in an election to select one [#permalink]
03 Jun 2012, 05:40
I hope questions like this doesnt appear on my GMAT I was not able to even understand the question in 2 mins ... So guessed E .. wrong for Sure
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Whenever she considers voting in an election to select one
[#permalink]
03 Jun 2012, 05:40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderators:
metallicafan, rajeevrks27, souvik101990, PTK, MacFauz, noboru, kissthegmat, carcass, willigetmylifeback, mikemcgarry, doe007, Vercules, Legendaddy, tuanquang269, RaviChandra, Marcab, Narenn
|
close
