Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack
GMAT Club

 It is currently 27 Mar 2017, 19:44

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# A researcher studying lawyers found that, on average,

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Status: 700 (q47,v40); AWA 6.0
Joined: 16 Mar 2011
Posts: 82
GMAT 1: 700 Q47 V40
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 108 [1] , given: 3

A researcher studying lawyers found that, on average, [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 May 2011, 12:45
1
KUDOS
00:00

Difficulty:

45% (medium)

Question Stats:

59% (02:18) correct 41% (01:23) wrong based on 104 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

A researcher studying lawyers found that, on average, lawyers took more classes in philosophy as undergraduates than did members
of other professions. The research surmised that students who take philosophy classes are more likely to become lawyers.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the researcher’s conclusion?

A. Many undergraduates who indicate that they intend to pursue a legal career are told by their advisers to take a philosophy course.
B. During a trial, lawyers use their knowledge of philosophical arguments to attempt to influence the jury.
C. Not all students who take philosophy classes as undergraduates become lawyers.
D. Lawyers are also more likely to have taken classes in public speaking and political science than are members of other professions.
E. The lawyers studied by the researcher indicated that taking philosophy courses gave them important insight into rhetoric and
arguments
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Regards
Rahul

If you have any questions
New!
VP
Status: There is always something new !!
Affiliations: PMI,QAI Global,eXampleCG
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1346
Followers: 17

Kudos [?]: 250 [0], given: 10

Re: Lawyers and philosophy )TMH Verbal WrkBk) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 May 2011, 01:50
causal argument in play here.

philosophy ----. people become lawyers.

answer option doing a reversal of this will be the one.
lawyers ----> required to take philosophy.

A matches this perfectly well.
_________________

Visit -- http://www.sustainable-sphere.com/
Promote Green Business,Sustainable Living and Green Earth !!

GMAT Tutor
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 1180
Followers: 427

Kudos [?]: 1557 [0], given: 4

Re: Lawyers and philosophy )TMH Verbal WrkBk) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 May 2011, 13:56
retro wrote:
A researcher studying lawyers found that, on average, lawyers took more classes in philosophy as undergraduates than did members
of other professions. The research surmised that students who take philosophy classes are more likely to become lawyers.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the researcher’s conclusion?

A. Many undergraduates who indicate that they intend to pursue a legal career are told by their advisers to take a philosophy course.
B. During a trial, lawyers use their knowledge of philosophical arguments to attempt to influence the jury.
C. Not all students who take philosophy classes as undergraduates become lawyers.
D. Lawyers are also more likely to have taken classes in public speaking and political science than are members of other professions.
E. The lawyers studied by the researcher indicated that taking philosophy courses gave them important insight into rhetoric and
arguments

This question doesn't make a lot of sense. First, there's an incomplete comparison in the question: "students who take philosophy classes are more likely to become lawyers." More likely than what? That sentence could mean two different things: "students who take philosophy classes are more likely to become lawyers than are students who don't take philosophy", or "students who take philosophy classes are more likely to become lawyers than they are to become something else". If this were a Sentence Correction question, we'd need to fix that sentence.

So it isn't even clear what conclusion we're trying to weaken. Second, the question is clearly designed to test reversal of causality - the researcher concludes that philosophy courses lead people to want to become lawyers, but it's just as possible that wanting to become a lawyer leads people to take philosophy courses - but the setup is flawed. The question is based on measuring a probability: the probability that someone in a philosophy class will become a lawyer. One completely natural way to assess that probability is to consider the percentage of philosophy students who go on to become lawyers. If you look at that percentage, then it makes no difference *why* the students took philosophy. If philosophy courses are very popular among people who want to become lawyers, then naturally one would expect, choosing a random philosophy student, that it is likely he or she will become a lawyer. It's only if you measure that probability in an unnatural way that the argument suffers from a reversal of causality error. That is, it's only if the conclusion is that "if someone randomly enrolls in a philosophy course, he or she will become more likely to then pursue a legal career than if he or she did not enroll in the philosophy course" that you have the reversal of causality error that this question is getting at.

It's not a good question. Where is it from?
_________________

GMAT Tutor in Toronto

If you are looking for online GMAT math tutoring, or if you are interested in buying my advanced Quant books and problem sets, please contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com

Last edited by IanStewart on 24 May 2011, 04:11, edited 1 time in total.
Manager
Status: Completed GMAT on 22 Nov 2011
Joined: 08 Nov 2010
Posts: 167
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 67 [0], given: 12

Re: Lawyers and philosophy )TMH Verbal WrkBk) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 May 2011, 21:17
Premise:
A researcher studying lawyers found that, on average, lawyers took more classes in philosophy as undergraduates than did members
of other professions.

Conclusion:
The research surmised that students who take philosophy classes are more likely to become lawyers.

Assumption:
More philosophy classes lead to becoming lawyer

Gap:
The writer of the argument fails to consider that students might have chosen Philosophy classes because students are advised to do so. The argument writer rather thinks that students will become lawyers because they are taking more philosophy classes.

So, if we attack the point "students will not become lawyers even though they are taking more philosophy classes", and disprove it, we will get our answer. We can disprove the argument by filling the gap.

So, the answer is option (A)
Manager
Status: 700 (q47,v40); AWA 6.0
Joined: 16 Mar 2011
Posts: 82
GMAT 1: 700 Q47 V40
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 108 [0], given: 3

Re: Lawyers and philosophy )TMH Verbal WrkBk) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 May 2011, 21:20
Everyone of you answers that the correct choice is A. But what I wanted to know is why C does not weaken the conclusion as well. C actually provides data that not all Phi students become lawyers.

Regards
Rahul
_________________

Regards
Rahul

Manager
Status: 700 (q47,v40); AWA 6.0
Joined: 16 Mar 2011
Posts: 82
GMAT 1: 700 Q47 V40
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 108 [0], given: 3

Re: Lawyers and philosophy (TMH Verbal WrkBk) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 May 2011, 21:22
IanStewart wrote:
retro wrote:
A researcher studying lawyers found that, on average, lawyers took more classes in philosophy as undergraduates than did members
of other professions. The research surmised that students who take philosophy classes are more likely to become lawyers.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the researcher’s conclusion?

A. Many undergraduates who indicate that they intend to pursue a legal career are told by their advisers to take a philosophy course.
B. During a trial, lawyers use their knowledge of philosophical arguments to attempt to influence the jury.
C. Not all students who take philosophy classes as undergraduates become lawyers.
D. Lawyers are also more likely to have taken classes in public speaking and political science than are members of other professions.
E. The lawyers studied by the researcher indicated that taking philosophy courses gave them important insight into rhetoric and
arguments

This question doesn't make a lot of sense. First, there's an incomplete comparison in the question: "students who take philosophy classes are more likely to become lawyers." More likely than what? That sentence could mean two different things: "students who take philosophy classes are more likely to become lawyers than students who don't take philosophy", or "students who take philosophy classes are more likely to become lawyers than they are to become something else". If this were a Sentence Correction question, we'd need to fix that sentence.

So it isn't even clear what conclusion we're trying to weaken. Second, the question is clearly designed to test reversal of causality - the researcher concludes that philosophy courses lead people to want to become lawyers, but it's just as possible that wanting to become a lawyer leads people to take philosophy courses - but the setup is flawed. The question is based on measuring a probability: the probability that someone in a philosophy class will become a lawyer. One completely natural way to assess that probability is to consider the percentage of philosophy students who go on to become lawyers. If you look at that percentage, then it makes no difference *why* the students took philosophy. If philosophy courses are very popular among people who want to become lawyers, then naturally one would expect, choosing a random philosophy student, that it is likely he or she will become a lawyer. It's only if you measure that probability in an unnatural way that the argument suffers from a reversal of causality error. That is, it's only if the conclusion is that "if someone randomly enrolls in a philosophy course, he or she will become more likely to then pursue a legal career than if he or she did not enroll in the philosophy course" that you have the reversal of causality error that this question is getting at.

It's not a good question. Where is it from?

The question is from the GMAT Verbal workbook by TMH

Rgds
Rahul
_________________

Regards
Rahul

Manager
Status: Completed GMAT on 22 Nov 2011
Joined: 08 Nov 2010
Posts: 167
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 67 [0], given: 12

Re: Lawyers and philosophy )TMH Verbal WrkBk) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 May 2011, 22:34
retro wrote:
Everyone of you answers that the correct choice is A. But what I wanted to know is why C does not weaken the conclusion as well. C actually provides data that not all Phi students become lawyers.

Regards
Rahul

Option (C) doesn't weaken the argument but in fact it supports the conclusion of the author.

The author concludes that "students who take philosophy classes are more likely to become lawyers". So, in the conclusion the author is inherently saying that "some students are unlikely to become lawyers".
Math Forum Moderator
Joined: 20 Dec 2010
Posts: 2019
Followers: 162

Kudos [?]: 1767 [0], given: 376

Re: Lawyers and philosophy )TMH Verbal WrkBk) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 May 2011, 03:12
retro wrote:
A researcher studying lawyers found that, on average, lawyers took more classes in philosophy as undergraduates than did members
of other professions. The research surmised that students who take philosophy classes are more likely to become lawyers.

Conclusion: Most of the students who take philosophy class as UG's become lawyer.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the researcher’s conclusion?

A. Many undergraduates who indicate that they intend to pursue a legal career are told by their advisers to take a philosophy course.
Supports: Why most philosophy students become lawyer; because they were counseled that philosophy is kind of a necessity if a person wants to be a lawyer later.

B. During a trial, lawyers use their knowledge of philosophical arguments to attempt to influence the jury.
Out of scope. How lawyers' knowledge of philosophy can assist them in their practice.

C. Not all students who take philosophy classes as undergraduates become lawyers.
It doesn't undermine the conclusion because researcher concluded that students are likely to become lawyer. He never said all students become lawyer. Thus, this is just a restatement of conclusion.

D. Lawyers are also more likely to have taken classes in public speaking and political science than are members of other professions.
Extra information about lawyers. Out of scope.

E. The lawyers studied by the researcher indicated that taking philosophy courses gave them important insight into rhetoric and
arguments
Out of scope. Again, how lawyers' knowledge of philosophy can assist them in their law studies and profession.

Ans: None of the above.

One possible statement that could have undermined researcher's conclusion:
The number of lawyers researcher studied comprises less than 1% of people who are in that profession.
_________________
GMAT Tutor
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Posts: 1180
Followers: 427

Kudos [?]: 1557 [0], given: 4

Re: Lawyers and philosophy (TMH Verbal WrkBk) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 May 2011, 05:12
retro wrote:
The question is from the GMAT Verbal workbook by TMH

Yes, I saw that in the thread title, but I didn't recognize the acronym 'TMH'. Does that stand for something, or is it just a small prep company that I wouldn't likely have heard of? One or two of their questions that you posted seemed good, but this one is not.
_________________

GMAT Tutor in Toronto

If you are looking for online GMAT math tutoring, or if you are interested in buying my advanced Quant books and problem sets, please contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com

Manager
Status: 700 (q47,v40); AWA 6.0
Joined: 16 Mar 2011
Posts: 82
GMAT 1: 700 Q47 V40
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 108 [0], given: 3

Re: Lawyers and philosophy )TMH Verbal WrkBk) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 May 2011, 05:56
TMH stands for Tata McGraw Hill.

/
retro
_________________

Regards
Rahul

Manager
Status: 700 (q47,v40); AWA 6.0
Joined: 16 Mar 2011
Posts: 82
GMAT 1: 700 Q47 V40
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 108 [0], given: 3

Re: Lawyers and philosophy )TMH Verbal WrkBk) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 May 2011, 06:02
fluke wrote:
retro wrote:
A researcher studying lawyers found that, on average, lawyers took more classes in philosophy as undergraduates than did members
of other professions. The research surmised that students who take philosophy classes are more likely to become lawyers.

Conclusion: Most of the students who take philosophy class as UG's become lawyer.

I'd disagree with your conclusion fluke. I read the conclusion as "Students who take Philosophy classes are more likely to become lawyers". Not that "Most students who take philosophy become lawyers". I am seeing a very subtle difference.

I agree that this is a causal argument. I'd read it as follows:

The students of philosophy classes are more likely to be lawyers because they are in philosophy and because lawyers in their college days took more classes in Philosophy.

In my view, the best way to undermine the argument is to assign some other reason for philosophy students becoming lawyers. And A does that job the best. In fact, C also does the trick. My confusion was between these two choices.

Opinions?

/
Rahul
_________________

Regards
Rahul

Retired Moderator
Status: 2000 posts! I don't know whether I should feel great or sad about it! LOL
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 1708
Location: Peru
Schools: Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, MIT & HKS (Government)
WE 1: Economic research
WE 2: Banking
WE 3: Government: Foreign Trade and SMEs
Followers: 102

Kudos [?]: 956 [0], given: 109

Re: Lawyers and philosophy )TMH Verbal WrkBk) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Jun 2011, 23:32
+1 A
_________________

"Life’s battle doesn’t always go to stronger or faster men; but sooner or later the man who wins is the one who thinks he can."

My Integrated Reasoning Logbook / Diary: http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-ir-logbook-diary-133264.html

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Manager
Joined: 14 Dec 2010
Posts: 217
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 680 Q44 V39
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 5

Re: Lawyers and philosophy )TMH Verbal WrkBk) [#permalink]

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2011, 05:20
Typical Causal argument. A it is.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10671
Followers: 958

Kudos [?]: 214 [0], given: 0

Re: A researcher studying lawyers found that, on average, [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Sep 2016, 05:18
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Re: A researcher studying lawyers found that, on average,   [#permalink] 28 Sep 2016, 05:18
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
6 State researchers have found that 10 28 Jan 2017, 00:58
2 A researcher studying corporate executives 2 01 Aug 2014, 19:10
1 A researcher studying corporate executives found that they 5 28 Apr 2012, 21:09
1 In the course of her researches, a historian recently found 8 30 Jul 2009, 04:08
6 In the course of her researches, a historian recently found 27 19 Aug 2008, 06:14
Display posts from previous: Sort by