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.
Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
Kick off your 2019 GMAT prep with a free 7-day boot camp that includes free online lessons, webinars, and a full GMAT course access. Limited for the first 99 registrants! Feb. 21st until the 27th.
A paratrooper, when asked whether he believed the military objective
[#permalink]
Show Tags
05 Nov 2010, 16:58
3
13
00:00
A
B
C
D
E
Difficulty:
55% (hard)
Question Stats:
58% (01:32) correct 42% (01:41) wrong based on 729 sessions
HideShow timer Statistics
A paratrooper, when asked whether he believed the military objective was important, commented: “Well, it sort of commands the valley, so it would be important in a conventional war. But this isn’t a conventional war, so I guess it means nothing.”
The speaker’s conclusion would be most strengthened if it were true that
A. the speaker is skilled in conventional warfare
B. commanding a valley is important in unconventional wars
C. commanding the valley is an objective in the war under discussion
D. this is an unconventional war
E. whatever is important in a conventional war is unimportant in an unconventional war
Re: A paratrooper, when asked whether he believed the military objective
[#permalink]
Show Tags
17 Nov 2010, 08:35
7
3
shrive555 wrote:
A paratrooper, when asked whether he believed the military objective was important, commented: “Well, it sort of commands the valley, so it would be important in a conventional war. But this isn’t a conventional war, so I guess it means nothing.”
The speaker’s conclusion would be most strengthened if it were true that
the speaker is skilled in conventional warfare commanding a valley is important in unconventional wars commanding the valley is an objective in the war under discussion this is an unconventional war whatever is important in a conventional war is unimportant in an unconventional war
Look at his train of thought: Premises: Commands the valley, so important in conventional war. This is not conventional war.
Conclusion: So not important.
This is not a logical conclusion, right? Something that is important in conventional war could also be important in an unconventional one. What can I do to strengthen this conclusion. Is there a missing premise, which, if added could make this argument logical? If I were to add a premise here 'what is important in a conventional war, is not important in an unconventional one', would the conclusion become valid?
See again: Premises: -Commands the valley, so important in conventional war. -This is not conventional war. -What is important in a conventional war, is not important in an unconventional one
Conclusion: So not important.
Now it is a valid conclusion. So the argument can be strengthened by adding this premise, this new information. Hence, answer is (E).
_________________
Karishma Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >
Re: A paratrooper, when asked whether he believed the military objective
[#permalink]
Show Tags
22 Jul 2016, 03:14
strengthen is nothing but a type of assumption support the link between premise and conclusion option E is a straightforward choice as provides the basic assumption on which the underlying argument is based. If we negate this statement we can see that the conclusion clearly falls apart Correct answer - E
Re: A paratrooper, when asked whether he believed the military objective
[#permalink]
Show Tags
08 Sep 2018, 00:41
VeritasKarishma wrote:
shrive555 wrote:
A paratrooper, when asked whether he believed the military objective was important, commented: “Well, it sort of commands the valley, so it would be important in a conventional war. But this isn’t a conventional war, so I guess it means nothing.”
The speaker’s conclusion would be most strengthened if it were true that
the speaker is skilled in conventional warfare commanding a valley is important in unconventional wars commanding the valley is an objective in the war under discussion this is an unconventional war whatever is important in a conventional war is unimportant in an unconventional war
Look at his train of thought: Premises: Commands the valley, so important in conventional war. This is not conventional war.
Conclusion: So not important.
This is not a logical conclusion, right? Something that is important in conventional war could also be important in an unconventional one. What can I do to strengthen this conclusion. Is there a missing premise, which, if added could make this argument logical? If I were to add a premise here 'what is important in a conventional war, is not important in an unconventional one', would the conclusion become valid?
See again: Premises: -Commands the valley, so important in conventional war. -This is not conventional war. -What is important in a conventional war, is not important in an unconventional one
Conclusion: So not important.
Now it is a valid conclusion. So the argument can be strengthened by adding this premise, this new information. Hence, answer is (E).
Re: A paratrooper, when asked whether he believed the military objective
[#permalink]
Show Tags
08 Sep 2018, 03:39
Anoushka1995 wrote:
VeritasKarishma wrote:
shrive555 wrote:
A paratrooper, when asked whether he believed the military objective was important, commented: “Well, it sort of commands the valley, so it would be important in a conventional war. But this isn’t a conventional war, so I guess it means nothing.”
The speaker’s conclusion would be most strengthened if it were true that
the speaker is skilled in conventional warfare commanding a valley is important in unconventional wars commanding the valley is an objective in the war under discussion this is an unconventional war whatever is important in a conventional war is unimportant in an unconventional war
Look at his train of thought: Premises: Commands the valley, so important in conventional war. This is not conventional war.
Conclusion: So not important.
This is not a logical conclusion, right? Something that is important in conventional war could also be important in an unconventional one. What can I do to strengthen this conclusion. Is there a missing premise, which, if added could make this argument logical? If I were to add a premise here 'what is important in a conventional war, is not important in an unconventional one', would the conclusion become valid?
See again: Premises: -Commands the valley, so important in conventional war. -This is not conventional war. -What is important in a conventional war, is not important in an unconventional one
Conclusion: So not important.
Now it is a valid conclusion. So the argument can be strengthened by adding this premise, this new information. Hence, answer is (E).
(D) is already given in the argument (this is an unconventional war). Hence adding it again will have no impact on the argument/conclusion.
_________________
Karishma Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Learn more about how Veritas Prep can help you achieve a great GMAT score by checking out their GMAT Prep Options >
Re: A paratrooper, when asked whether he believed the military objective
[#permalink]
Show Tags
08 Sep 2018, 04:22
E is clear cut answer here. If we negate Option E our conclusion shall fall apart. Also Option D is an inference answer choice Anoushka1995 _________________
Never Settle for something less than what you deserve...........
I've failed over and over and over again in my life and that is why I succeed--Michael Jordan Kudos drives a person to better himself every single time. So Pls give it generously Wont give up till i hit a 700+
Re: A paratrooper, when asked whether he believed the military objective
[#permalink]
Show Tags
08 Sep 2018, 05:34
This question might be kind of silly but where is it mentioned that it's an unconventional war? It could also mean that there is no war at all. That is the reason that I did not chose E. I chose C instead which says "C. commanding the valley is an objective in the war under discussion ". Can someone please explain?
Re: A paratrooper, when asked whether he believed the military objective
[#permalink]
Show Tags
24 Sep 2018, 02:46
How can the answer be E, it is too extreme. For instance, clearing out of civilians might be important in a conventional war that does not mean it is not important in an unconditional war. War is still war and civilians need to be evacuated.
Similarly there might be many reasons where things can be both important and unimportant in both cases. We can't generalize and assume everything that is important in a conventional war is not important in an unconventional war.
Re: A paratrooper, when asked whether he believed the military objective
[#permalink]
Show Tags
25 Sep 2018, 08:10
1
vanditk2 wrote:
How can the answer be E, it is too extreme. For instance, clearing out of civilians might be important in a conventional war that does not mean it is not important in an unconditional war. War is still war and civilians need to be evacuated.
Similarly there might be many reasons where things can be both important and unimportant in both cases. We can't generalize and assume everything that is important in a conventional war is not important in an unconventional war.
You are confusing two different questions: 1) whether E is (or can be) true, and 2) whether if it true, it strengthens the argument? You give excellent reasons to think the answer to the first question is "no". But this is not the relevant question! To answer the question we are asked, we must assume E is true (plausibility and likelihood aside) and investigate the logical conclusion of that. In this case, if E is true, it seriously strengthens the claim.
_________________
Re: A paratrooper, when asked whether he believed the military objective
[#permalink]
Show Tags
25 Sep 2018, 08:13
Rid21sa wrote:
This question might be kind of silly but where is it mentioned that it's an unconventional war? It could also mean that there is no war at all. That is the reason that I did not chose E. I chose C instead which says "C. commanding the valley is an objective in the war under discussion ". Can someone please explain?
C only tells us what we could have already assumed - that C is an objective. this is heavily implied in the question. but it does nothing to strengthen the conclusion.
as for E - look at my answer to vanditk2: you seem to be discussion whether the information in E makes sense or is likely or not. but this is beside the point. the question is : If E is true, does this strengthen the conclusion? The answer is yes, because this is something the paratrooper is assuming, and knowing it is true would strengthen his claim.
_________________
close
58% (01:32) correct 
