Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
09 May 2022, 01:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
B
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
5%
(low)
Question Stats:
83% (00:46) correct
17%
(00:53)
wrong
based on 185
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
All elephants are grey. And all mice are grey. Therefore, I conclude that all elephants are mice.
The argument above is invalid because ?
(A) The writer bases his argument on another argument that contains circular reasoning.
(B) The writer has illogically classified two disparate groups together when there is no relationship between them, except that they both have the same attribute.
(C) The writer has made a mistaken analogy between two dissimilar qualities.
(D) The writer has used a fallacy which involves the ambiguous description of animals by their color.
(E) The writer has failed to express his reasoning fully.
The argument above is invalid because ?
(A) The writer bases his argument on another argument that contains circular reasoning.
(B) The writer has illogically classified two disparate groups together when there is no relationship between them, except that they both have the same attribute.
(C) The writer has made a mistaken analogy between two dissimilar qualities.
(D) The writer has used a fallacy which involves the ambiguous description of animals by their color.
(E) The writer has failed to express his reasoning fully.
09 May 2022, 03:45
Kudos
Bookmarks
Ans:B
(A) The writer bases his argument on another argument that contains circular reasoning.
(B) The writer has illogically classified two disparate groups together when there is no relationship between them, except that they both have the same attribute....correct
(C) The writer has made a mistaken analogy between two dissimilar qualities.
(D) The writer has used a fallacy which involves the ambiguous description of animals by their color.
(E) The writer has failed to express his reasoning fully.
(A) The writer bases his argument on another argument that contains circular reasoning.
(B) The writer has illogically classified two disparate groups together when there is no relationship between them, except that they both have the same attribute....correct
(C) The writer has made a mistaken analogy between two dissimilar qualities.
(D) The writer has used a fallacy which involves the ambiguous description of animals by their color.
(E) The writer has failed to express his reasoning fully.
PyjamaScientist
Admitted - Which School Forum Moderator
Joined: 25 Oct 2020
Last visit: 04 Apr 2026
Posts: 1,126
Given Kudos: 633
Schools: Ross '25 (M$)
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42 (Online)
Products:
09 May 2022, 03:53
Kudos
Bookmarks
(B) looks good to me. Time taken 01:25.
As per the author: Elephants are mice because they both are the same colour. Is the author an eleven-year-old kid?
Just because they share the same colour, how can the author classify them as "one". This is what comes to your mind when you read the argument. And this is what (B) states: "The writer has illogically classified two disparate groups together when there is no relationship between them, except that they both have the same attribute."
(A) There's no circular reasoning here. For those who are scratching their head over what this "Circular Reasoning" is, here is an example- "A loves B, B loves C, so C loves A."
(C) There is no analogy made. Analogies are like examples that you use in parallel reasoning. For example: "Just as an Apple falls from the tree when ripe, I fall from my bed when stoned".
(D) "Used a fallacy"? Author's entire preposition is a fallacy. He hasn't used any. What he has used is a "fact" that both the animals share same colour. The conclusion that he has accrued from this information is a "fallacy".
(E) True he hasn't expressed his reasoning. But, is this why the author's argument is invalid? No. It's invalid for it uses a fact to fact to establish an absurd conclusion.
As per the author: Elephants are mice because they both are the same colour. Is the author an eleven-year-old kid?
Just because they share the same colour, how can the author classify them as "one". This is what comes to your mind when you read the argument. And this is what (B) states: "The writer has illogically classified two disparate groups together when there is no relationship between them, except that they both have the same attribute."
(A) There's no circular reasoning here. For those who are scratching their head over what this "Circular Reasoning" is, here is an example- "A loves B, B loves C, so C loves A."
(C) There is no analogy made. Analogies are like examples that you use in parallel reasoning. For example: "Just as an Apple falls from the tree when ripe, I fall from my bed when stoned".
(D) "Used a fallacy"? Author's entire preposition is a fallacy. He hasn't used any. What he has used is a "fact" that both the animals share same colour. The conclusion that he has accrued from this information is a "fallacy".
(E) True he hasn't expressed his reasoning. But, is this why the author's argument is invalid? No. It's invalid for it uses a fact to fact to establish an absurd conclusion.
