KarishmaB wrote:
In real life too, if 100% adherence improves situation, it does not imply 50% adherence is likely to improve the situation somewhat.
Thank you
KarishmaB for your elaboration.
I can finally see this point now. It is really cool that these CR questions can often teach me something new or clear up a misconception.
Thank you for you time and thank you for helping me learn.
AndrewN wrote:
I agree wholeheartedly with the above. I can think of no other members who have spent so much time responding to each point someone has raised in response to a query. Several of my kudos have gone to GraceSCKao, and I look forward to seeing more after-the-fact analyses, which I believe can serve just as well as the Expert responses themselves to guide other members of the community.
AndrewN thank you.
I appreciate experts' and members' responses and explanations, and I think that in most cases, writing a following post is the least I can do to express my thankfulness. (In some cases, if I feel that I cannot bring a new point or view to the discussion, I chose not to write the following posts.)
AndrewN wrote:
There is no way to tell sometimes what anything other than 100 percent adherence will produce. We cannot assume that a tiered system of benefits will result. I do wonder whether a certain degree of cultural bias may be at work here.
I suppose that in the end, these considerations demonstrate once again that we cannot let real-world knowledge cloud our reasoning of GMAT™ logic. We cannot make assumptions about society based on what our own experience of that term may be. We just have to take what we see on the screen at face value.
Personally, I think sometimes using the real-world knowledge helps me greatly pre-think the correct answer in CR questions, but sometimes it just leads me to a different way, or worse, the opposite way. I remember for another CR question that talks about asthma, because I had a wrong idea then that people with asthma cannot exercise intensely, I had a serious doubt for the correct answer. (None of my friends I know with asthma can exercise intensely, and I also thought of Leonard in
The Big Bang Theory.)
The harm of rejecting the correct answer might outweigh the benefits of efficiently pre-thinking the correct answer, so I agree with you Andrew that it is better to be as objective as possible for solving these CR questions. (Sometimes doing so is hard, though, since the real-world experience and common sense can be confused.)
AndrewN wrote:
I am not sure how things may work in Taiwan, but when I visited Japan, for instance, I saw not a single piece of litter in the largest city in the world, no spray-painted areas under bridges. I did not even feel unsafe walking through a supposed yakuza-run red-light district at 3 in the morning (with a friend—I was not up to anything suspicious or naughty). My impression was that in Japan, although I am not so naïf as to think that nobody breaks the law, such activity is not done as openly as it may be in the U.S. To tie this into the question at hand, I suspect that in Japan, if the plan was to
reduce the number of lanes for automobiles and trucks and increase those for bicycles and pedestrians... to attract more workers and shoppers to downtown businesses, and if that plan were adhered to with less than 100 percent compliance, it would still prove a success (and it would probably be adhered to with 99 percent compliance).
In the U.S., to borrow the New York catchphrase,
Fuhgeddaboudit. I cannot tell you how many times, as a cyclist and commuter, I have been shouted at, honked at (by car horns), swerved at, and even been the target of a hurled drink or banana peel, all for riding my bike on the side of the road. (I do adhere to the laws when on my bike, since, you know, I do not want to get killed.)
Thank you for your interesting example.
I've been to Japan for several times. Although generally it is a safe country, walking on the streets at 3AM could still be a bit dangerous. But since you are male and a foreign tourist, it is likely that you are not the targets of the criminal activists. (I still sincerely suggest that you not do so the next time.)
I am not familiar with other continents, but in Asia, the degree that citizens follow the government's plan might be the highest in Japan. As for Taiwan, it is not bad but generally people are not that obedient (some people might ignore the measures for the sake of convenience. ) But overall, when a plan is implemented by a normal degree, it will still have some effects here. I've definitely let this real-world experience affect my reasoning in this CR question.
Thank you for your time and thoughts.
Thank you for helping me learn.
close
24 Jun 2022, 03:08
.
