Premises:
Main purpose of most criminal organizations is to generate profits.
Biotech and IT promise to generate enormous profits.

Conclusion: Criminal organizations will undoubtedly try to become increasingly involved in these areas.

When can we properly infer the conclusion?
When we say that an organisation whose purpose is to generate profit WILL get involved in any activity that promises to generate enormous profit. If this holds, then we know that criminal organisations will get into biotech and IT (since they promise to generate enormous profits).

(A) If an organization tries to become increasingly involved in areas that promise to generate enormous profits, then the main purpose of that organization is to generate profits.
Not correct. We need to establish the other way around - if an org's main purpose is profit, it will become involved in areas that promise to generate enormous profits.

(B) At least some criminal organizations are or will at some point become aware that the ongoing revolutions in biotechnology and information technology promise to generate enormous profits.
We do need to assume that the criminal orgs will become aware that biotech and IT fields promise to generate enormous profits but this doesn't help establish that the criminal orgs WILL get involved in biotech and IT fields. We need to say that criminal orgs will get involved in any field that promises to generate huge profits.

(C) Criminal organizations are already heavily involved in every activity that promises to generate enormous profits.
Not necessary to assume that they are ALREADY involved in every activity that promises huge profits.

(D) Any organization whose main purpose is to generate profits will try to become increasingly involved in any technological revolution that promises to generate enormous profits.
Correct as discussed above.

(E) Most criminal organizations are willing to become involved in legal activities if those activities are sufficiently profitable.
Does not imply that they will get involved in any legal activity that promises sufficient profits.

Answer (D)
_________________

Any explanation for the OA please?

Premise 1: The main purpose of most criminal organizations is to generate profits.
Premise 2: The ongoing revolutions in biotechnology and information technology promise to generate enormous profits.
Conclusion: Therefore, criminal organizations will undoubtedly try to become increasingly involved in these areas.

As we can see drastic jump to conclusion and strong too as indicated by bold face in the conclusion above. From most criminal organizations argument is generalized to all criminal organizations.
Our assumption should also be strong enough to be general and link premises to conclusion. We have a causality relation here.
Possible assumption: Organization looking to generate profits, will try to involve itself increasingly in such technological revolutions as,biological and IT revolutions, to generate enormous profits.

By POE using assumption above and by linking keywords in premises and conclusions highlighted, I selected D as below:

(A) If an organization tries to become increasingly involved in areas that promise to generate enormous profits, then the main purpose of that organization is to generate profits. Out as casualty is reversed.
(B) At least some criminal organizations are or will at some point become aware that the ongoing revolutions in biotechnology and information technology promise to generate enormous profits. Irrelevant since we are not concerned whether some organization,at some point of time, become aware about technological revolution. Negating this will not affect our conclusion here.
(C) Criminal organizations are already heavily involved in every activity that promises to generate enormous profits. Irrelevant how heavily an organization is in every activity promising to generate enormous profits.
(D) Any organization whose main purpose is to generate profits will try to become increasingly involved in any technological revolution that promises to generate enormous profits. Bingo. This what I assumed. A generalized assumption with keywords as above.
(E) Most criminal organizations are willing to become involved in legal activities if those activities are sufficiently profitable. Incorrect as we have a generalized conclusion and not related to most organizations.Moreover, willingness of organizations to become involved in legal activities not of any concern to us.

That's why I think we have D as our answer. Good question. Source?

still didnt get why B is incorrect.

(B) At least some criminal organizations are or will at some point become aware that the ongoing revolutions in biotechnology and information technology promise to generate enormous profits.

Negating the statement - None of the criminal organization are aware that the ongoing revolutions in biotechnology and information technology promise to generate enormous profits.

If they are not aware how will they become heavily involved. Only if they know they will get involved.

I am not sure if the Negation that you interpreted here is correct

Negation of B: None of criminal organizations are or will at some point become aware that the ongoing revolutions in biotechnology and information technology promise to generate enormous profits. But conclusion says that "Therefore, criminal organizations will undoubtedly try to become increasingly involved in these areas.".

Being unaware doesn't mean that none of the organizations will become increasingly involved with tech revolutions in Bio and IT. Some organization might use a new technology that it is not aware of its consequences but still use to see its promise and unknowingly it starts generating enormous profits. That's a technology revolution and since then the company will become increasingly involved with technology to generate enormous profits. At the same time, some company will involve a technology that it is not aware but still might use it to see if it promises to generate profit but it doesn't happen. Now can we say that just because a company is unaware of tech revolution in Bio and IT, it will not undoubtedly try to become involved increasingly in tech revolution in BIO and IT? We need a strong and generalized assumption to arrive at strong and generalized conclusion.

Based on the above reasoning only, I thought it's Irrelevant and doesn't really affect the conclusion.

If it is still unconvincing then may be some expert can throw more light on why B is incorrect.

even i thought " B" is also correct along with "D"..........but now i feel both have weaknesses.....


(B) At least some criminal organizations are or will at some point become aware that the ongoing revolutions in biotechnology and information technology promise to generate enormous profits...........HOWEVER-----SINCE- --- CONCLUSION SAYS.....Criminal organizations will undoubtedly try to become increasingly involved in these areas. IT MEANS THAT------NOT AT LEAST SOME BUT ALL WILL BECOME AWARE OF ONGOING REVOLUTION.... HENCE THIS CANNOT BE THE CORRECT ASSUMPTION...............INCORRECT.....

(D) Any organization whose main purpose is to generate profits will try to become increasingly involved in any technological revolution that promises to generate enormous profits.......INCORRECT. CONCLUSION SAYS.....Criminal organizations will undoubtedly try to become increasingly involved in these areas.,...SINCE .....The main purpose of most criminal organizations is to generate profits.....but THE ANSWER CHOICE JUMPS TO " ANY ORGANISATION WHO WANTS TO MAKEPROFIT".......MAY BE OTHERS WHO WANT TO MAKE PROFIT WANT TO CONTINUE AND EXPAND THEIR PRESENT INDUSTRY.....NOWHERE DOES THE PREMISE OR CONCLUSION MENTION ANY ORGANIZATION......HOW CAN THE ASSUMPTION JUMP TO IT......Assumption can only logically connect the premise to conclusion not something else to conclusion.....see the NEGATED VERSION...SOME organizations whose main purpose is to generate profits will not try to become increasingly involved in any technological revolution that promises to generate enormous profits....now these some may may not include the criminal organizations....and the CONCLUSION MAY STILL HOLD TRUE......[/color]


KUDOS IF YOU PLEASE......

I am not sure how negation of D destroys the argument.

Negated D: Not all organizations whose main purpose are to generate profits will try to become increasingly involved in any technological revolution that promises to generate enormous profits.
Ok, then still some organizations including criminal organizations could get still involved in any technological revolution. Still argument stands.

mikemcgarry, can you please help me understand OA D.

Thanks

Hi hellosanthosh2k2!

Carolyn from Magoosh here -- I can jump in for Mike

We can summarize the argument as follows:

Criminal organizations try to generate profits.
A new technological revolution will generate profits.
Therefore, criminal organizations will become involved in this technological revolution.

If we negate D, as you said, then not all organizations will become involved in this technological revolution. So, it may be true that criminal organizations will NOT become involved in this technological revolution. That directly invalidates the conclusion. If we have shown an example where the conclusion is not true (like we have done here), the conclusion is invalidated. Saying that criminal organizations might be involved in the technological revolution is not at all the same thing as saying that criminal organizations will become involved (the conclusion).

Does that make sense? If not, let me know!
-Carolyn
_________________

Dear Experts, would appreciate in validating if my analysis of the choice B was correct in this question. I have a doubt that I might not have rejected this option for the correct reason.

Argument analysis:
Main purpose of criminal organisation (CO) = generate profits
BT and IT = fields that promise considerable profits in near future
Conclusion = BT and IT will increase their involvement in these sectors because of the promise of the profits

Possible assumptions:
1. CO generate profits that are not greater that those promised by BT and IT
2. CO have the necessary tools to enter this field.

Main choices B and D:
Negation B: None organisations will become aware of the profit generation capability
Even if that happens there is a possibility that they may get involved to sort out their current activities. So this negation still keeps the door open for the conclusion to be true.

D: Not all CO try to enter into every field promising profits.
This clearly breaks the conclusion.

Doubt: In the initial attempt I marked B. While reanalyzing the argument have I jumped too far to join the dots?

Would appreciate detailed analysis of why option B is wrong.

Hi VeritasKarishma , I rejected D because it mentions ANY ORGANIZATION and not criminal organization. We don't need all organizations to comply with the observed rule.

Hence, picked B

Posted from my mobile device
_________________

That is exactly the reason you shouldn't be rejecting D. If any of the organization doesn't participate, that directly negates the conclusion.

ShankSouljaBoi

What you are looking for is a premise that will make your conclusion follow. The more inclusive the premise, the better it is for the conclusion. So 'any organisation' which is the same as 'all organisations' is perfect.

For example,

Timmy is a dog.
All dogs are loyal.

Conclusion - Timmy is loyal.

Great! The conclusion follows because ALL dogs are loyal. So Timmy must be loyal too.

Case 2:

Timmy is a dog.
Some dogs are loyal.

Conclusion - Timmy is loyal.

Does the conclusion follow now? Not really. Timmy may or may not be loyal.
_________________