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.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
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.
BillyZ
Current Student
Joined: 14 Nov 2016
Last visit: 03 May 2025
Posts: 1,143
Given Kudos: 926
Location: Malaysia
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: Sloan '23 (D) Tuck '23 (D) Darden '23 (D) Ross '23 (D) Kellogg '23 (D) Wharton '23 (D) Booth '23 (D) Fuqua '24 (A) Harvard '24 (D) Stanford '24 (D)
GMAT 1: 750 Q51 V40 (Online)
GPA: 3.53
Products:
Schools: Sloan '23 (D) Tuck '23 (D) Darden '23 (D) Ross '23 (D) Kellogg '23 (D) Wharton '23 (D) Booth '23 (D) Fuqua '24 (A) Harvard '24 (D) Stanford '24 (D)
GMAT 1: 750 Q51 V40 (Online)
Posts: 1,143
29 May 2017, 17:35
Kudos
Bookmarks
C
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
25%
(medium)
Question Stats:
78% (01:39) correct
22%
(01:56)
wrong
based on 9717
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Economist: The price of tap water in our region should be raised drastically. Supplies in local freshwater reservoirs have been declining for years because water is being used faster than it can be replenished. Since the price of tap water has been low, few users have bothered to adopt even easy conservation measures.
The two sections in boldface play which of the following roles in the economist's argument?
(A) The first is a conclusion for which support is provided, and which in turn supports the main conclusion; the second is the main conclusion.
(B) The first is an observation for which the second provides an explanation; the second is the main conclusion but not the only conclusion.
(C) The first is a premise supporting the argument's main conclusion; so is the second.
(D) The first is the only conclusion; the second provides an explanation for the first.
(E) The first is the main conclusion; the second is a conclusion for which support is provided, and which in turn supports the first.
The two sections in boldface play which of the following roles in the economist's argument?
(A) The first is a conclusion for which support is provided, and which in turn supports the main conclusion; the second is the main conclusion.
(B) The first is an observation for which the second provides an explanation; the second is the main conclusion but not the only conclusion.
(C) The first is a premise supporting the argument's main conclusion; so is the second.
(D) The first is the only conclusion; the second provides an explanation for the first.
(E) The first is the main conclusion; the second is a conclusion for which support is provided, and which in turn supports the first.
Situation
Local water supplies have been declining for years because of excessive water use and low prices. Few users have adopted even easy conservation measures.
Reasoning
What roles do the two boldface statements play in the argument? Both are factual observations. Since no further evidence or support is provided for either, neither can be a conclusion in the argument. However, interconnected causal explanations, signaled by because and since, are provided for both. The observation in the first boldface statement is causally explained by the further observation that water is being used faster than it can be replenished, which in turn is causally explained by the entire final sentence. The observation in the second boldface statement is causally explained by the observation that the price of tap water has been low. The only remaining portion of the argument is the initial sentence, a recommendation supported by these four observations together, and by the causal claims in which they are embedded. Thus, the four observations (including the two boldface statements) and the causal claims containing them are all premises, and the initial statement is the argument's only conclusion.
(A) As explained above, the two boldface statements are premises of the argument. Although causal explanations are provided for both, no support or evidence is provided for either.
(B) As explained above, the second boldface statement does provide part of the causal explanation for the observation in the first boldface statement. But no support is provided for either statement, so neither is a conclusion.
(C) Correct. As explained above, each of the statements is a premise that serves along with other claims to support the recommendation in the initial sentence, which is the argument's only conclusion, and in that sense its main conclusion.
(D) As explained above, the second boldface statement does provide part of the causal explanation for the observation in the first boldface statement. But no support is provided for either statement, so neither is a conclusion in the argument.
(E) As explained above, the two boldface statements are premises of the argument. Although causal explanations are provided for both, no support or evidence is provided for either.
Local water supplies have been declining for years because of excessive water use and low prices. Few users have adopted even easy conservation measures.
Reasoning
What roles do the two boldface statements play in the argument? Both are factual observations. Since no further evidence or support is provided for either, neither can be a conclusion in the argument. However, interconnected causal explanations, signaled by because and since, are provided for both. The observation in the first boldface statement is causally explained by the further observation that water is being used faster than it can be replenished, which in turn is causally explained by the entire final sentence. The observation in the second boldface statement is causally explained by the observation that the price of tap water has been low. The only remaining portion of the argument is the initial sentence, a recommendation supported by these four observations together, and by the causal claims in which they are embedded. Thus, the four observations (including the two boldface statements) and the causal claims containing them are all premises, and the initial statement is the argument's only conclusion.
(A) As explained above, the two boldface statements are premises of the argument. Although causal explanations are provided for both, no support or evidence is provided for either.
(B) As explained above, the second boldface statement does provide part of the causal explanation for the observation in the first boldface statement. But no support is provided for either statement, so neither is a conclusion.
(C) Correct. As explained above, each of the statements is a premise that serves along with other claims to support the recommendation in the initial sentence, which is the argument's only conclusion, and in that sense its main conclusion.
(D) As explained above, the second boldface statement does provide part of the causal explanation for the observation in the first boldface statement. But no support is provided for either statement, so neither is a conclusion in the argument.
(E) As explained above, the two boldface statements are premises of the argument. Although causal explanations are provided for both, no support or evidence is provided for either.
sobby
Current Student
Joined: 14 Nov 2014
Last visit: 24 Jan 2022
Posts: 444
Given Kudos: 54
Location: India
Schools: Rotman '20 (S) Kelley '21 (S) (A)
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.76
30 May 2017, 07:53
Kudos
Bookmarks
hazelnut
The first bold part is a premise / observation - it is not a conclusion for sure .
So A,D ,E easily eliminated
between B and C
now the second part is not the main conclusion , the main conclusion is "The price of tap water in our region should be raised drastically"
So eliminate B ..
C is only choice left.
08 Sep 2022, 05:11
Kudos
Bookmarks
The Story
Economist: The price of tap water in our region should be raised drastically.
The economist makes a strong claim in this statement. The price of tap water should be raised drastically.
(He’ll probably share reasons for why he believes the price needs an overhaul. Let’s find out.)
Supplies in local freshwater reservoirs have been declining for years because water is being used faster than it can be replenished.
Right. So this sentence starts with a reason for why the price should be raised.
The reason: the supply of tap water has been declining for years (I gather that local freshwater reservoirs form the supply to tap water.)
The statement also gives us a reason for why local freshwater reservoirs have been depleting.
The reason: Water is being used too fast.
Since the price of tap water has been low, few users have bothered to adopt even easy conservation measures.
Now we understand why supplies in reservoirs have been declining.
The reason: Users haven’t bothered to converse water – pretty much at all.
The statement also gives us a reason for why users haven’t bothered.
The reason: Tap water is too cheap.
Gist:
Tap water has been cheap.
(That’s why) users haven’t bothered to conserve water. (BF2)
(That’s why) water is being used faster than it can be replenished.
(That’s why) supplies in local reservoirs have been declining. (BF1)
(To avoid all this,) the price of tap water should be raised drastically. (main point)
The argument is essentially a Jenga tower with one idea stacked on top of another. Where the previous one is the reason for the following one. The main point is that if the first tile is removed (tap water is made expensive), the tower will fall.
Question Stem
The two sections in boldface play which of the following roles in the economist’s argument?
Both the sections in boldface are tiles in the Jenga tower and provide support for the main point.
Answer Choice Analysis
(A) The first is a conclusion for which support is provided, and which in turn supports the main conclusion; the second is the main conclusion.
Incorrect.
1. There is no support provided for BF1. The idea that ‘supplies in local freshwater reservoirs have been declining for years’ is a fact. This decline has actually been happening. The author does not indicate any uncertainty about this. Since BF1 is a fact, it cannot be a conclusion, nor can it be supported by another statement.
Sure, there is a reason given for why it is happening, but that reason doesn’t support the fact that it is happening.
e.g.
The sun appears round because it is a sphere.
This sentence is made up of two ideas:
- The sun appears round
- The sun is a sphere
Both these ideas are facts. The sun does appear round. The sun is a sphere. The second idea is the reason for the first idea. However, it does not provide support for the first idea. We already know that the sun appears round. After learning that the sun is a sphere, my confidence does not increase in the notion that the sun appears round.
BF1 does support the main conclusion. But because of the above reason, the first half is wrong.
2. BF2 is not the main conclusion. The main conclusion is that the price of tap water should be raised drastically. BF2 supports the main point. The second half is wrong
(B) The first is an observation for which the second provides an explanation; the second is the main conclusion but not the only conclusion.
Incorrect.
- 1. BF2 does provide an explanation for BF1. The first half is correct.
2. BF2 is not a conclusion at all. The second half is wrong.
(C) The first is a premise supporting the argument's main conclusion; so is the second.
Correct.
- 1. As discussed in the gist above, BF1 does support the argument’s main conclusion.
2. BF2 also supports the main conclusion. One way to understand this is that if users had conserved water (negation of BF2), there would be less reason to raise the price of tap water drastically.
(D) The first is the only conclusion; the second provides an explanation for the first.
Incorrect.
- 1. It is a fact that supplies in local reservoirs have been declining. BF1 is not a conclusion. Moreover, even if it had been a conclusion, it wouldn’t have been the ONLY one. The first statement – the price of tap water should be raised drastically – is the argument’s main point. This half is wrong.
2. BF2 does provide an explanation for BF1. This half is correct.
(E) The first is the main conclusion; the second is a conclusion for which support is provided, and which in turn supports the first.
Incorrect.
- 1. It is a fact that supplies in local reservoirs have been declining. BF1 is not a conclusion. Wrong.
2. BF2 is not a conclusion. It is a fact that users haven’t bothered to conserve water. We are given a reason for why that’s happened. However, there is no support for it. (I have highlighted the difference between ‘reason’ and ‘support’ in the explanation of option A). BF2 does support BF1. Wrong.
