It is currently 20 Oct 2017, 13:17

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

CR: Similar reasoning

Author Message
Manager
Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 95

Kudos [?]: 87 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

20 Dec 2005, 06:41
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Of the two proposals for solving the traffic problems on Main Street, Chenâ€™s plan is better for the city as a whole, as is clear from the fact that the principal supporter of Ripleyâ€™s plan is Smith Stores. Smith Stores, with its highly paid consultants, knows where its own interest lies and, moreover, has supported its own interests in the past, even to the detriment of the city as a whole.

The faulty reasoning in which one of the following is most parallel to that in the argument above?
(A) Surely Centreville should oppose adoption of the regional planning commissionâ€™s new plan since it is not in Centrevilleâ€™s interest, even though it might be in the interest of some towns in the region.
(B) The school board should support the plan for the new high school since this plan was recommended by the well-qualified consultants whom the school board hired at great expense.
(C) Of the two budget proposals, the mayorâ€™s is clearly preferable to the city councilâ€™s, since the mayorâ€™s budget addresses the needs of the city as a whole, whereas the city council is protecting special interests.
(D) Nomura is clearly a better candidate for college president than Miller, since Nomura has the support of the three deans who best understand the presidentâ€™s job and with whom the president will have to work most closely.
(E) The planned light-rail system will clearly serve suburban areas well, since its main opponent is the city government, which has always ignored the needs of the suburbs and sought only to protect the interests of the city.
_________________

JAI HIND!

Kudos [?]: 87 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Posts: 544

Kudos [?]: 40 [0], given: 0

Location: Germany

Show Tags

20 Dec 2005, 08:14
Statement reasoning: We support candidate A, because candidate B's supporter is C, who is known as biased (he wants to achieve the solution that fits best his purpose) and whose interest once had been detrimental to the city.

I think E is parallel.

Kudos [?]: 40 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 1798

Kudos [?]: 170 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

20 Dec 2005, 10:25
What is wrong with C?

Kudos [?]: 170 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 14 Nov 2005
Posts: 37

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

Location: NYC

Show Tags

20 Dec 2005, 11:37
C looks right.

The statement pattern is:

Between A and B, A is preferred because B looks for self interest and not for any public good.

Quote:
Of the two budget proposals, the mayorâ€™s is clearly preferable to the city councilâ€™s, since the mayorâ€™s budget addresses the needs of the city as a whole, whereas the city council is protecting special interests.

Looking at the pattern, C is the only choice which contrasts the two budget proposals.

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

SVP
Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 1700

Kudos [?]: 473 [0], given: 0

Location: Dhaka

Show Tags

20 Dec 2005, 13:11
It is E for sure.
_________________

hey ya......

Kudos [?]: 473 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 21 Sep 2003
Posts: 1057

Kudos [?]: 82 [0], given: 0

Location: USA

Show Tags

20 Dec 2005, 13:32
Vote for (E) as well

Original argument:
A is better because B is supported by C which has special interest.
The original argument DOES NOT JUSTIFY why A (Chen's Plan) IS BETTER than B. It just denies the B on the basis of C's support.

(C) A (Mayor's plan) is better because it addresses city's needs whereas B (city council's plan) doesn't and.
This JUSTIFIES why A is better. Hence does not have the same reasoning as the original argument.

(E) A is better because B, it's opponent, has special interests....
Similar to the original argument this DOES NOT JUSTIFY why A is better but just denies B based on some reasoning.

Kudos [?]: 82 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 06 Jun 2004
Posts: 1050

Kudos [?]: 181 [0], given: 0

Location: CA

Show Tags

20 Dec 2005, 13:40
X = Chen's ==> Good
Y = Ripley's ==> Bad ==> Main supporter is Smith Stores who often supported its own interestes over that of the city's

The argument here is that it uses the detriments of Y to justify the benefit of X.

Only E makes a parallel argument construction
_________________

Don't be afraid to take a flying leap of faith.. If you risk nothing, than you gain nothing...

Kudos [?]: 181 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 95

Kudos [?]: 87 [0], given: 0

Show Tags

20 Dec 2005, 16:59
Statement reasoning: We support candidate A, because candidate B's supporter is C, who is known as biased (he wants to achieve the solution that fits best his purpose) and whose interest once had been detrimental to the city.

I think E is parallel.

Simple and straightforward. Like the way you have reasoned. OA is E.
_________________

JAI HIND!

Kudos [?]: 87 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 09 Sep 2005
Posts: 18

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

Show Tags

21 Dec 2005, 09:02
E

JAI HIND wrote:
Of the two proposals for solving the traffic problems on Main Street, Chenâ€™s plan is better for the city as a whole, as is clear from the fact that the principal supporter of Ripleyâ€™s plan is Smith Stores. Smith Stores, with its highly paid consultants, knows where its own interest lies and, moreover, has supported its own interests in the past, even to the detriment of the city as a whole.

The faulty reasoning in which one of the following is most parallel to that in the argument above?
(A) Surely Centreville should oppose adoption of the regional planning commissionâ€™s new plan since it is not in Centrevilleâ€™s interest, even though it might be in the interest of some towns in the region.
(B) The school board should support the plan for the new high school since this plan was recommended by the well-qualified consultants whom the school board hired at great expense.
(C) Of the two budget proposals, the mayorâ€™s is clearly preferable to the city councilâ€™s, since the mayorâ€™s budget addresses the needs of the city as a whole, whereas the city council is protecting special interests.
(D) Nomura is clearly a better candidate for college president than Miller, since Nomura has the support of the three deans who best understand the presidentâ€™s job and with whom the president will have to work most closely.
(E) The planned light-rail system will clearly serve suburban areas well, since its main opponent is the city government, which has always ignored the needs of the suburbs and sought only to protect the interests of the city.

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

Re: CR: Similar reasoning   [#permalink] 21 Dec 2005, 09:02
Display posts from previous: Sort by