It is currently 18 Oct 2017, 08:06

# Live Now:

### 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

# Any serious policy discussion about acceptable levels of

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 19 Dec 2009
Posts: 41

Kudos [?]: 79 [2], given: 52

### Show Tags

09 Sep 2010, 04:23
2
KUDOS
3
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

61% (01:34) correct 39% (01:50) wrong based on 294 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Any serious policy discussion about acceptable levels of risk in connection with explosions is not well served if the participants fail to use the word “explosion” and use the phrase “energetic disassembly” instead. In fact, the word “explosion” elicits desirable reactions, such as a heightened level of attention, whereas the substitute phrase does not. Therefore, of the two terms, “explosion” is the one that should be used throughout discussions of this sort.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument above depends?

(A) In the kind of discussion at issue, the advantages of desirable reactions to the term “explosion” outweigh the drawbacks, if any, arising from undesirable reactions to that term.
(B) The phrase “energetic disassembly” has not so far been used as a substitute for the word “explosion” in the kind of discussion at issue.
(C) In any serious policy discussion, what is said by the participants is more important than how it is put into words.
(D) The only reason that people would have for using “energetic disassembly” in place of “explosion” is to render impossible any serious policy discussion concerning explosions.
(E) The phrase “energetic disassembly” is not necessarily out of place in describing a controlled rather than an accidental explosion

I am not able to paraphrase the argument pls help????

source : LSAT
If it is nice and challenging enough, don't forget Kadoss
OA: A
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Kudos [?]: 79 [2], given: 52

Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Posts: 327

Kudos [?]: 81 [1], given: 0

Location: USA
WE 1: Engineering

### Show Tags

09 Sep 2010, 06:24
1
KUDOS
I used POE to get to A.

C, D & E are straight out, sort of irrelevant. Re-checking A & B, even B appeared irrelevant.

Plus, the statement emphasizes that the desirable impact is dependent on the word that is used; explosion or energetic disassembly". Hence, it is closer to A, which is emphasizing that advantages (desirable reactions).

The argument simply means - use of the word explosion has "desirable reactions" and "energetic ...." doesn't have the same impact. .............. one is more advantageous than the other ........
_________________

All things are possible to those who believe.

Kudos [?]: 81 [1], given: 0

Current Student
Joined: 12 Jun 2009
Posts: 1837

Kudos [?]: 273 [0], given: 52

Location: United States (NC)
Concentration: Strategy, Finance
Schools: UNC (Kenan-Flagler) - Class of 2013
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V39
WE: Programming (Computer Software)

### Show Tags

09 Sep 2010, 06:36
amirdubai1982 wrote:
Any serious policy discussion about acceptable levels of risk in connection with explosions is not well served if the participants fail to use the word “explosion” and use the phrase “energetic disassembly” instead. In fact, the word “explosion” elicits desirable reactions, such as a heightened level of attention, whereas the substitute phrase does not. Therefore, of the two terms, “explosion” is the one that should be used throughout discussions of this sort.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument above depends?

(A) In the kind of discussion at issue, the advantages of desirable reactions to the term “explosion” outweigh the drawbacks, if any, arising from undesirable reactions to that term. The author definitely want the word explosion to be used for the desirable effects
(B) The phrase “energetic disassembly” has not so far been used as a substitute for the word “explosion” in the kind of discussion at issue.
possibly but we dont know that
(C) In any serious policy discussion, what is said by the participants is more important than how it is put into words.
irrelevant
(D) The only reason that people would have for using “energetic disassembly” in place of “explosion” is to render impossible any serious policy discussion concerning explosions.
we dont know that
(E) The phrase “energetic disassembly” is not necessarily out of place in describing a controlled rather than an accidental explosion
new info - could be true but never mentioned
I am not able to paraphrase the argument pls help????

source : LSAT
If it is nice and challenging enough, don't forget Kadoss
OA: A

_________________

Kudos [?]: 273 [0], given: 52

Senior Manager
Status: Upset about the verbal score - SC, CR and RC are going to be my friend
Joined: 30 Jun 2010
Posts: 316

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 6

### Show Tags

09 Sep 2010, 06:45
I got A too through POE. I was debating between A and E then read the conclusion again to decide on A.
_________________

My gmat story
MGMAT1 - 630 Q44V32
MGMAT2 - 650 Q41V38
MGMAT3 - 680 Q44V37
GMATPrep1 - 660 Q49V31
Knewton1 - 550 Q40V27

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 6

Senior Manager
Joined: 14 Jun 2010
Posts: 301

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 7

### Show Tags

10 Sep 2010, 22:42
Got to A through POE....

Kudos [?]: 25 [0], given: 7

Director
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 533

Kudos [?]: 74 [0], given: 46

### Show Tags

10 Sep 2010, 23:24
amirdubai1982 wrote:
Any serious policy discussion about acceptable levels of risk in connection with explosions is not well served if the participants fail to use the word “explosion” and use the phrase “energetic disassembly” instead. In fact, the word “explosion” elicits desirable reactions, such as a heightened level of attention, whereas the substitute phrase does not. Therefore, of the two terms, “explosion” is the one that should be used throughout discussions of this sort.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument above depends?

(A) In the kind of discussion at issue, the advantages of desirable reactions to the term “explosion” outweigh the drawbacks, if any, arising from undesirable reactions to that term.
The argument is that "explosion" is the best term to use for discussions. This answer choice here says that the advantages of using the term "explosion" outweigh the drawbacks.
(B) The phrase “energetic disassembly” has not so far been used as a substitute for the word “explosion” in the kind of discussion at issue.
"Does not help the argument that "explosion" is preferable.
(C) In any serious policy discussion, what is said by the participants is more important than how it is put into words.
Does not narrow down the term "explosion" enough.
(D) The only reason that people would have for using “energetic disassembly” in place of “explosion” is to render impossible any serious policy discussion concerning explosions.
It can render it impossible, but it does not help to support the fact that "explosion" is the term that needs to be used in discussions.
(E) The phrase “energetic disassembly” is not necessarily out of place in describing a controlled rather than an accidental explosion
Not really relevant

I am not able to paraphrase the argument pls help????

Argument is that the term "explosion" is important for serious policy discussion because it elicits desirable reactions.

source : LSAT
If it is nice and challenging enough, don't forget Kadoss
OA: A

Hope this helps,
Dawg
_________________

It's a dawg eat dawg world.

Kudos [?]: 74 [0], given: 46

SVP
Joined: 16 Nov 2010
Posts: 1598

Kudos [?]: 592 [0], given: 36

Location: United States (IN)
Concentration: Strategy, Technology

### Show Tags

19 Apr 2011, 23:04
I got A by POE.
_________________

Formula of Life -> Achievement/Potential = k * Happiness (where k is a constant)

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Kudos [?]: 592 [0], given: 36

Senior Manager
Joined: 09 Feb 2011
Posts: 272

Kudos [?]: 214 [1], given: 13

Concentration: General Management, Social Entrepreneurship
Schools: HBS '14 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V47

### Show Tags

20 Apr 2011, 05:04
1
KUDOS
amirdubai1982 wrote:
Any serious policy discussion about acceptable levels of risk in connection with explosions is not well served if the participants fail to use the word “explosion” and use the phrase “energetic disassembly” instead. In fact, the word “explosion” elicits desirable reactions, such as a heightened level of attention, whereas the substitute phrase does not. Therefore, of the two terms, “explosion” is the one that should be used throughout discussions of this sort.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument above depends?

(A) In the kind of discussion at issue, the advantages of desirable reactions to the term “explosion” outweigh the drawbacks, if any, arising from undesirable reactions to that term.
(B) The phrase “energetic disassembly” has not so far been used as a substitute for the word “explosion” in the kind of discussion at issue.
(C) In any serious policy discussion, what is said by the participants is more important than how it is put into words.
(D) The only reason that people would have for using “energetic disassembly” in place of “explosion” is to render impossible any serious policy discussion concerning explosions.
(E) The phrase “energetic disassembly” is not necessarily out of place in describing a controlled rather than an accidental explosion

I am not able to paraphrase the argument pls help????

source : LSAT
If it is nice and challenging enough, don't forget Kadoss
OA: A

Paraphrase is: If you have to really discuss risks related to explosions, call explosions 'explosions' and not 'energetic dissembly', because only word explosion creates in audience reactions like serious attention which are required for serious discussion.

Kudos [?]: 214 [1], given: 13

Director
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 871

Kudos [?]: 396 [0], given: 123

### Show Tags

20 Apr 2011, 13:04
Brilliant !
vivesomnium wrote:
amirdubai1982 wrote:
Any serious policy discussion about acceptable levels of risk in connection with explosions is not well served if the participants fail to use the word “explosion” and use the phrase “energetic disassembly” instead. In fact, the word “explosion” elicits desirable reactions, such as a heightened level of attention, whereas the substitute phrase does not. Therefore, of the two terms, “explosion” is the one that should be used throughout discussions of this sort.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument above depends?

(A) In the kind of discussion at issue, the advantages of desirable reactions to the term “explosion” outweigh the drawbacks, if any, arising from undesirable reactions to that term.
(B) The phrase “energetic disassembly” has not so far been used as a substitute for the word “explosion” in the kind of discussion at issue.
(C) In any serious policy discussion, what is said by the participants is more important than how it is put into words.
(D) The only reason that people would have for using “energetic disassembly” in place of “explosion” is to render impossible any serious policy discussion concerning explosions.
(E) The phrase “energetic disassembly” is not necessarily out of place in describing a controlled rather than an accidental explosion

I am not able to paraphrase the argument pls help????

source : LSAT
If it is nice and challenging enough, don't forget Kadoss
OA: A

Paraphrase is: If you have to really discuss risks related to explosions, call explosions 'explosions' and not 'energetic dissembly', because only word explosion creates in audience reactions like serious attention which are required for serious discussion.

Kudos [?]: 396 [0], given: 123

VP
Status: There is always something new !!
Affiliations: PMI,QAI Global,eXampleCG
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1285

Kudos [?]: 281 [0], given: 10

### Show Tags

15 Jun 2011, 08:56
questioning why is just so apt here.
Why an explosion should be called with its original word has to be answered here. The heightened level of attentions is required but why ?

A clearly answers these and other options just don't even come close.

A it is.
_________________

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

Kudos [?]: 281 [0], given: 10

Intern
Joined: 19 Jun 2011
Posts: 2

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

### Show Tags

22 Jun 2011, 22:05
Hi
What is POE?

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

Manager
Joined: 14 Dec 2010
Posts: 202

Kudos [?]: 41 [0], given: 5

Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 680 Q44 V39

### Show Tags

23 Jun 2011, 10:33
Even i got A by POE

Kudos [?]: 41 [0], given: 5

Current Student
Joined: 26 May 2005
Posts: 555

Kudos [?]: 238 [0], given: 13

### Show Tags

23 Jun 2011, 10:38
Coolasice81 wrote:
Hi
What is POE?

process of elimination.. to probability of correct answer is 20%(1 out of 5)
if we eliminate one wrong choice .. ur probability increases to 25% ( i out of 4) and so on....

Kudos [?]: 238 [0], given: 13

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10117

Kudos [?]: 261 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

10 Jul 2014, 00:58
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.

Kudos [?]: 261 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 18 May 2015
Posts: 46

Kudos [?]: 56 [1], given: 123

### Show Tags

04 Jun 2015, 23:08
1
KUDOS
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Any serious policy discussion about acceptable levels of risk in connection with explosions is not well served if the participants fail to use the word “explosion” and use the phrase “energetic disassembly” instead. In fact, the word “explosion” elicits desirable reactions, such as a heightened level of attention, whereas the substitute phrase does not. Therefore, of the two terms, “explosion” is the one that should be used throughout discussions of this sort.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument above depends?

(A) In the kind of discussion at issue, the advantages of desirable reactions to the term “explosion” outweigh the drawbacks, if any, arising from undesirable reactions to that term.
(B) The phrase “energetic disassembly” has not so far been used as a substitute for the word “explosion” in the kind of discussion at issue.
(C) In any serious policy discussion, what is said by the participants is more important than how it is put into words.
(D) The only reason that people would have for using “energetic disassembly” in place of “explosion” is to render impossible any serious policy discussion concerning explosions.
(E) The phrase “energetic disassembly” is not necessarily out of place in describing a controlled rather than an accidental explosion
_________________

Regards,
Sam GM

Kudos [?]: 56 [1], given: 123

Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 29 Apr 2015
Posts: 894

Kudos [?]: 1803 [0], given: 302

Location: Switzerland
Concentration: Economics, Finance
Schools: LBS MIF '19
WE: Asset Management (Investment Banking)
Re: Any serious policy discussion [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jun 2015, 06:00
gmt1 wrote:
Any serious policy discussion about acceptable levels of risk in connection with explosions is not well served if the participants fail to use the word “explosion” and use the phrase “energetic disassembly” instead. In fact, the word “explosion” elicits desirable reactions, such as a heightened level of attention, whereas the substitute phrase does not. Therefore, of the two terms, “explosion” is the one that should be used throughout discussions of this sort.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument above depends?

(A) In the kind of discussion at issue, the advantages of desirable reactions to the term “explosion” outweigh the drawbacks, if any, arising from undesirable reactions to that term.
(B) The phrase “energetic disassembly” has not so far been used as a substitute for the word “explosion” in the kind of discussion at issue.
(C) In any serious policy discussion, what is said by the participants is more important than how it is put into words.
(D) The only reason that people would have for using “energetic disassembly” in place of “explosion” is to render impossible any serious policy discussion concerning explosions.
(E) The phrase “energetic disassembly” is not necessarily out of place in describing a controlled rather than an accidental explosion

Do you have any explaination for AC A and E? E sounds nice too. I would have chosen E because if the term "energetic disassembly" is not ouf of place, then it is an issue to chose between the two terms ... so we have to assume that.
_________________

Saving was yesterday, heat up the gmatclub.forum's sentiment by spending KUDOS!

PS Please send me PM if I do not respond to your question within 24 hours.

Kudos [?]: 1803 [0], given: 302

Intern
Joined: 02 Nov 2014
Posts: 1

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

Schools: Foster '18
Re: Any serious policy discussion [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jun 2015, 06:52
1
KUDOS
The Argument doesnt talk anything about the types of explosion..hence its quite out of scope to include them

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

Current Student
Joined: 21 Aug 2014
Posts: 138

Kudos [?]: 224 [0], given: 49

GMAT 1: 610 Q49 V25
GMAT 2: 730 Q50 V40
Re: Any serious policy discussion [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Jun 2015, 23:31
Use the word “Explosion” = desirable reactions = discussed well served
Use the word “Energetic disassembly” = NO desirable reactions = discussion Not well served

Conclusion: Use the word "Explosion" throughout in the discussion.

Possible assumptions:
1) Only those terms concerning "Desirable reactions" find place throughout the discussion.
2) Only those discussions that are well served are used throughout the discussion.

Choice A is correct.

P.S.: I had initially chosen choice C , but then I realised that it does not bridge the gap between the premise and conclusion, which is why to use the word "Explosion" throughout in the discussion.
_________________

Please consider giving Kudos if you like my explanation

Kudos [?]: 224 [0], given: 49

Manager
Joined: 03 May 2015
Posts: 107

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 48

### Show Tags

10 Aug 2015, 16:19
Request you not to write your queries/answers/opinions in question window. It prevents ppl from analysing the question. The whole purpose of GMAT Club forum goes wasted by doing so.

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 48

Intern
Joined: 21 Oct 2016
Posts: 11

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 10

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Healthcare
WE: Research (Health Care)
Re: Any serious policy discussion [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 May 2017, 11:22
Can anyone explain in detail why option E is not correct?

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 10

Re: Any serious policy discussion   [#permalink] 25 May 2017, 11:22

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 21 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by