GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 25 Sep 2018, 14:07

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

A contract, whether expressed or unexpressed, exists when

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 29 Oct 2008
Posts: 386
Location: United States
Concentration: Marketing, Technology
A contract, whether expressed or unexpressed, exists when  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Oct 2013, 10:26
1
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  45% (medium)

Question Stats:

57% (02:08) correct 43% (02:04) wrong based on 94 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

A contract, whether expressed or unexpressed, exists when two parties engage with each other for the reciprocal transfer of benefits. Thus, in accepting support from public funds, an artist creates at least an unexpressed contract between himself or herself and the public, and the public can rightly expect to benefit from the artist's work.

Which one of the following most accurately describes an error in reasoning in the passage?


(A) attempting to justify a rule of conduct on the grounds that it confers benefits on all of the parties involved

(B) concluding that a definition is fully applicable to a situation when it is known only that the situation conforms partially to that definition

(C) speaking only in abstract terms about matters that involve contingencies and that must be judged on a case-by-case basis

(D) confusing the type of mental or emotional activity in which an individual can engage with the mental or emotional states that can characterize groups of individuals

(E) treating an issue that requires resolution through political processes as if it were merely a matter of opinion

_________________

If you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hits, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you wanna be because of anybody! Cowards do that and You're better than that!
The path is long, but self-surrender makes it short; the way is difficult, but perfect trust makes it easy.

Fire the final bullet only when you are constantly hitting the Bull's eye, till then KEEP PRACTICING.
Failure establishes only this, that our determination to succeed was not strong enough.
Getting defeated is just a temporary notion, giving it up is what makes it permanent.

http://gmatclub.com/forum/1000-sc-notes-at-one-place-in-one-document-with-best-of-explanations-192961.html

Press +1 Kudos, if you think my post gave u a tiny tip.

Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4664
Re: A contract, whether expressed or unexpressed, exists when  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Oct 2013, 15:25
3
joshnsit wrote:
A contract, whether expressed or unexpressed, exists when two parties engage with each other for the reciprocal transfer of benefits. Thus, in accepting support from public funds, an artist creates at least an unexpressed contract between himself or herself and the public, and the public can rightly expect to benefit from the artist's work.

Which one of the following most accurately describes an error in reasoning in the passage?
(A) attempting to justify a rule of conduct on the grounds that it confers benefits on all of the parties involved
(B) concluding that a definition is fully applicable to a situation when it is known only that the situation conforms partially to that definition
(C) speaking only in abstract terms about matters that involve contingencies and that must be judged on a case-by-case basis
(D) confusing the type of mental or emotional activity in which an individual can engage with the mental or emotional states that can characterize groups of individuals
(E) treating an issue that requires resolution through political processes as if it were merely a matter of opinion

Plz explain your answer for sure...
OA to follow...

Dear joshnsit,
This is tagged as a Kaplan question, but I believe this is an LSAT question. LSAT reasoning questions are very tricky!

Here, we first are given the premise --- when folks "engage with each other for the reciprocal transfer of benefits", then there's a contract (explicit or implicit). OK, so far, so good.

Then, we get the example of the artist who gets mega-bucks from the government. OK, the artist has received money, so thereby has received a benefit. Is this a relationship in which the parties "engage with each other for the reciprocal transfer of benefits"? That's quite unclear.

You see, when the government issues public funds to a contractor to, for example, pave a highway or build a bridge, then there is something tangible in the public space that results from this expenditure of public money, and in theory, say, the bridge could provide the same benefit (passage over a river) to any and all citizens. The contractor benefits from public money, and the public benefits from the bridge --- that's "a reciprocal transfer of benefits." An artist creates art, and then individuals have their own private experience ---- some people may get nothing from any art, and others will be moved by the art. The experience of art is something very private and personal, how I feel about this work of art ---- in that sense, its quite unlike the example of the bridge.

Is the reason the government or private citizens support the arts to provide a benefit? Does art "benefit" people? What is would be the "benefit" that art provides? These are really subtle philosophical questions, but the point is, it's not at all clear that the relationship of artist-public is a relationship that both parties entered expecting a "reciprocal transfer of benefits". It doesn't fit the definition of "a reciprocal transfer of benefits", certainly not in the same way as if the government asked a contractor to build something tangible and practical.

The answer that directly addresses this issue is (B), which I believe is the OA. The artist-public relationship, whatever it may be, does not neatly fit a relationship predicated on "a reciprocal transfer of benefits", and therefore the contract which the premise discusses is not relevant to the artist.

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Image

Image

Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 02 Oct 2017
Posts: 23
CAT Tests
Re: A contract, whether expressed or unexpressed, exists when  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Feb 2018, 05:36
mikemcgarry wrote:
joshnsit wrote:
A contract, whether expressed or unexpressed, exists when two parties engage with each other for the reciprocal transfer of benefits. Thus, in accepting support from public funds, an artist creates at least an unexpressed contract between himself or herself and the public, and the public can rightly expect to benefit from the artist's work.

Which one of the following most accurately describes an error in reasoning in the passage?
(A) attempting to justify a rule of conduct on the grounds that it confers benefits on all of the parties involved
(B) concluding that a definition is fully applicable to a situation when it is known only that the situation conforms partially to that definition
(C) speaking only in abstract terms about matters that involve contingencies and that must be judged on a case-by-case basis
(D) confusing the type of mental or emotional activity in which an individual can engage with the mental or emotional states that can characterize groups of individuals
(E) treating an issue that requires resolution through political processes as if it were merely a matter of opinion

Plz explain your answer for sure...
OA to follow...

Dear joshnsit,
This is tagged as a Kaplan question, but I believe this is an LSAT question. LSAT reasoning questions are very tricky!

Here, we first are given the premise --- when folks "engage with each other for the reciprocal transfer of benefits", then there's a contract (explicit or implicit). OK, so far, so good.

Then, we get the example of the artist who gets mega-bucks from the government. OK, the artist has received money, so thereby has received a benefit. Is this a relationship in which the parties "engage with each other for the reciprocal transfer of benefits"? That's quite unclear.

You see, when the government issues public funds to a contractor to, for example, pave a highway or build a bridge, then there is something tangible in the public space that results from this expenditure of public money, and in theory, say, the bridge could provide the same benefit (passage over a river) to any and all citizens. The contractor benefits from public money, and the public benefits from the bridge --- that's "a reciprocal transfer of benefits." An artist creates art, and then individuals have their own private experience ---- some people may get nothing from any art, and others will be moved by the art. The experience of art is something very private and personal, how I feel about this work of art ---- in that sense, its quite unlike the example of the bridge.

Is the reason the government or private citizens support the arts to provide a benefit? Does art "benefit" people? What is would be the "benefit" that art provides? These are really subtle philosophical questions, but the point is, it's not at all clear that the relationship of artist-public is a relationship that both parties entered expecting a "reciprocal transfer of benefits". It doesn't fit the definition of "a reciprocal transfer of benefits", certainly not in the same way as if the government asked a contractor to build something tangible and practical.

The answer that directly addresses this issue is (B), which I believe is the OA. The artist-public relationship, whatever it may be, does not neatly fit a relationship predicated on "a reciprocal transfer of benefits", and therefore the contract which the premise discusses is not relevant to the artist.

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)


------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hi @mikemcgarry,

Understood your explanation well. Could you please explain as to why (D) is irrelevant as an answer choice. (D) seems pretty confusing in its text!

Thanks,

ucb2k7
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
S
Joined: 30 Oct 2017
Posts: 176
Re: A contract, whether expressed or unexpressed, exists when  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Feb 2018, 19:27
ucb2k7 wrote:
Hi @mikemcgarry,

Understood your explanation well. Could you please explain as to why (D) is irrelevant as an answer choice. (D) seems pretty confusing in its text!

Thanks,

ucb2k7


Hi ucb2k7!

I can jump in for Mike here :-)

Choice (D) is definitely pretty confusing! Let's take a look:

(D) confusing the type of mental or emotional activity in which an individual can engage with the mental or emotional states that can characterize groups of individuals

Let's break this down. First of all, we see some repeated words: "mental or emotional". The first part is talking about "mental or emotional activity" and the second part mentions "mental or emotional states". These seem pretty similar. Keeping that in mind, we can see that there is a comparison here between individuals and groups of individuals. (D) is basically saying that the fallacy is confusing actions/states of individuals vs. actions/states of groups. It's saying that the argument fails to differentiate between actions taken by an individual and actions taken by a group. The question is, is that true?

The argument talks about "parties". It seems pretty clear that a "party" can refer to either an individual (the artist), or a group of people (the public). So if a contract is between two parties, it shouldn't really matter whether we're talking about individuals or groups. There isn't any indication that an individual will have a different "mental or emotional state" than a group, or vice versa. So we can conclude that (D) doesn't really apply here.

Hope that helps! :-)
-Carolyn
_________________

Magoosh Test Prep

Image

Image

GMAT Club Bot
Re: A contract, whether expressed or unexpressed, exists when &nbs [#permalink] 21 Feb 2018, 19:27
Display posts from previous: Sort by

A contract, whether expressed or unexpressed, exists when

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Events & Promotions

PREV
NEXT


Copyright

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

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

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®.