NEW HERE? LEARN MORE
closeclose
Last visit was: 26 Apr 2024, 04:47 It is currently 26 Apr 2024, 04:47
Decision Tracker
My Rewards
New posts
New comers' posts

Close
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
Your Progress

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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel

Dana intentionally watered the plant every other day. But since the pl

SORT BY:
Date
Kudos
Tags:
Find Similar Topics 
Show Tags
Hide Tags
User avatar
L
nahid78
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 12 Mar 2013
Posts: 289
Own Kudos [?]: 606 [14]
Given Kudos: 1063
Send PM
Reviews Badge
Dana intentionally watered the plant every other day. But since the pl [#permalink] New post   Updated on: 15 Jan 2019, 00:36
2
Kudos
12
Bookmarks
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

35% (medium)

Question Stats:

70% (01:49) correct 30% (02:01) wrong based on 520 sessions
Hide Show timer Statistics
Dana intentionally watered the plant every other day. But since the plant was a succulent, and needed dry soil, the frequent watering killed the plant. Therefore Dana intentionally killed the plant.

Which one of the following arguments exhibits a flawed pattern of reasoning most similar to the flawed pattern of reasoning exhibited in the argument above?


(A) Jack stole $10 from Kelly and bet it on a race. The bet returned $100 to Jack. Therefore Jack really stole $100 from Kelly.

(B) Celeste knows that coffee is grown in the mountains in Peru and that Peru is in South America. Therefore Celeste should know that coffee is grown in South America.

(C) The restaurant owner decided to take an item off her restaurant’s menu. This decision disappointed Jerry because that item was his favorite dish. Therefore the restaurant owner decided to disappoint Jerry.

(D) The heavy rain caused the dam to break, and the breaking of the dam caused the fields downstream to be flooded. Therefore the heavy rain caused the flooding of the fields.

(E) The power plant raised the water temperature, and whatever raised the water temperature is responsible for the decrease in fish. Therefore the power plant is responsible for the decrease in fish.
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
C

Originally posted by nahid78 on 19 Aug 2015, 06:19.
Last edited by Bunuel on 15 Jan 2019, 00:36, edited 1 time in total.
Renamed the topic and edited the question.
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
L
nahid78
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 12 Mar 2013
Posts: 289
Own Kudos [?]: 606 [6]
Given Kudos: 1063
Send PM
Reviews Badge
Re: Dana intentionally watered the plant every other day. But since the pl [#permalink] New post   11 Sep 2016, 02:50
6
Kudos
This is a good example of how modifiers can create logical confusion _ in this case, the modifier "intentionally." Dana intentionally watered the plant. Her actions led to the plant’s death. Therefore Dana intentionally killed the plant? This conclusion is unwarranted. (Just for fun, step outside of the LSAT for a moment and consider this argument. Can you imagine wanting to kill a plant, and then deciding to do so by over-watering it over the course of several days or weeks?)

It is plausible, if not likely, that Dana did not know that watering the plant frequently would lead to its death. The insertion of the word "intentionally" in the conclusion is the big error. While it is true that Dana caused the plant to die (killed it), there is insufficient evidence to conclude that she killed it intentionally. When we evaluate the choices, we should look for this false "intention" in the conclusion. (C) demonstrates the same flaw. Yes, the owner took the item off the menu, and yes that decision disappointed Jerry, but did the owner intend to disappoint Jerry?

(A) is incorrect because it does not match the original argument whatsoever. It includes no incorrect assumption of intentionality.
(B) is wrong because it does not match the original argument, and doesn’t even represent a flawed argument. This reasoning is actually quite sound.
(D) does not represent flawed reasoning. A caused B, B caused C, therefore A caused C.
(E) is like (D). A caused B, and whatever caused B caused C. Therefore A caused C. This reasoning is not flawed.
General Discussion
User avatar
L
Abhishek009
Board of Directors
Joined: 11 Jun 2011
Status:QA & VA Forum Moderator
Posts: 6072
Own Kudos [?]: 4690 [2]
Given Kudos: 463
Location: India
GPA: 3.5
WE:Business Development (Commercial Banking)
Send PM
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Dana intentionally watered the plant every other day. But since the pl [#permalink] New post   11 Sep 2016, 03:25
2
Kudos
A good question !! And an equally good Explanation provided by nahid78

This question can be dealt with if we consider the Dependent / Independent action

Quote:
Independent action 1 : Watering the Plants every day
Independent action 2 : Frequent watering of the succulent plant ( which required dry soil ) killed the plant ( Effect 2 )

Thus these are the 2 independent action and a causal conclusion is drawn that action 1 was a deliberate action performed for the specific effect


The flaw in the stimulus can be easily predicted as shown by nahid78

Quote:
That Dana did not know that watering the plant frequently would lead to its death. The insertion of the word "intentionally" in the conclusion is the big error.


Now, once check the answer option and find a similarity ( only (C) will work )

Quote:
The restaurant owner decided to take an item off her restaurant’s menu. This decision disappointed Jerry because that item was his favorite dish. Therefore the restaurant owner decided to disappoint Jerry.


Quote:
Independent Action 1 : Restaurant owner decision to take an item off her restaurant’s menu.
Independent Action 2 : The decision disappointed Jerry
Effect : Restaurant owner decided to disappoint Jerry.


Thus these are the 2 independent action and a causal conclusion is drawn that action 1 was a deliberate action performed for the specific effect


Hence Correct answer is (C)
User avatar
L
abhimahna
Board of Directors
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Status:Emory Goizueta Alum
Posts: 3600
Own Kudos [?]: 5426 [1]
Given Kudos: 346
Send PM
Reviews Badge
Re: Dana intentionally watered the plant every other day. But since the pl [#permalink] New post   25 May 2017, 05:49
1
Bookmarks
Expert Reply
Original argument pattern:

Dana gave water intentionally.

Plant dies because of its succulent nature and dry soil requirements.

So, Dana intentionally killed plants. Non sense. May be she doesn't the requirements of that plant. SO, how can we blame the poor Dana?

Now, we need find out some logic similar to the above one.

(A) Jack stole $10 from Kelly and bet it on a race. The bet returned $100 to Jack. Therefore Jack really stole $100 from Kelly. : Oh. Still he is a thief. How can we say if he si going to return those $10, he is not a thief? But this pattern is not similar to what we want.

(B) Celeste knows that coffee is grown in the mountains in Peru and that Peru is in South America. Therefore Celeste should know that coffee is grown in South America. : Fine, he should know about this. Good Logic not as weird as we are looking for.

(C) The restaurant owner decided to take an item off her restaurant’s menu. This decision disappointed Jerry because that item was his favorite dish. Therefore the restaurant owner decided to disappoint Jerry. Oh, Mr Jerry is a customer. May be the owner doesn't know Mr Jerry. So, how can we say he did so just to disappoint Mr Jerry. Non sense. Matches with what we want. Hence, correct.

(D) The heavy rain caused the dam to break, and the breaking of the dam caused the fields downstream to be flooded. Therefore the heavy rain caused the flooding of the fields. Yes, A caused B. B caused C, Therefore, A caused C. Transitive property. Maths experts would know what I am talking about. :)

(E) The power plant raised the water temperature, and whatever raised the water temperature is responsible for the decrease in fish. Therefore the power plant is responsible for the decrease in fish. Same as D
User avatar
VerbalBot
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 17227
Own Kudos [?]: 848 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: Dana intentionally watered the plant every other day. But since the pl [#permalink] New post   12 Oct 2022, 01:00
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.
GMAT Club Bot
gmatclubot
Re: Dana intentionally watered the plant every other day. But since the pl [#permalink]
12 Oct 2022, 01:00
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6921 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts
mysterymanrog
CR Forum Moderator
832 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne
Main navigation
GMAT Resources
Partners
MBA Resources
www.gmac.com|www.mba.com | | GMAT Club Rules | Terms and Conditions