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.
Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:
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
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.
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
(N/A)
Question Stats:
0%
(00:00)
correct 100%
(00:18)
wrong
based on 1
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Many New Yorkers falsely believe that extreme temperatures in winter will be followed by extreme temperatures in the following summer. The three New York winters with the lowest average temperature were followed by summers in which the average temperature was extremely high, yet the two hottest New York winters were also followed by summers whose average temperatures were extremely high.
Which of the following describes the greatest flaw in the author's reasoning?
New York winters and summers are not necessarily representative of winters and summers in other locations. (off topic) The author appeals to a previous argument that contains circular reasoning. (I would say yes - because this is it) The evidence presented is insufficient to decide the matter with full certainty. (could be - but a diversion) A causal relationship is being assumed without being proven. (could be but some evidence is being thrown - so some proof is provided - diversion again) The evidence presented supports the claim it is intended to refute. (evidence - sentence 1 - claim sentence 2 and 3 - sentence 2 is supported by evidence 1. flaw is in sentence 3 - sentence 1 does not support sentence 3- especially the use of word "yet" presumes that 1 does not support 3 - rather then B becomes the correct answer on elimination)
Answer is E However no refuting is there in the sentence. The flaw lies in the last part "hottest winters followed by hot summers" - whereas evidence given is "extremes in winter leads to extremes in summer" -
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Many New Yorkers falsely believe that extreme temperatures in winter will be followed by extreme temperatures in the following summer. The three New York winters with the lowest average temperature were followed by summers in which the average temperature was extremely high, yet the two hottest New York winters were also followed by summers whose average temperatures were extremely high.
Which of the following describes the greatest flaw in the author's reasoning?
New York winters and summers are not necessarily representative of winters and summers in other locations. (off topic) The author appeals to a previous argument that contains circular reasoning. (I would say yes - because this is it) The evidence presented is insufficient to decide the matter with full certainty. (could be - but a diversion) A causal relationship is being assumed without being proven. (could be but some evidence is being thrown - so some proof is provided - diversion again) The evidence presented supports the claim it is intended to refute. (evidence - sentence 1 - claim sentence 2 and 3 - sentence 2 is supported by evidence 1. flaw is in sentence 3 - sentence 1 does not support sentence 3- especially the use of word "yet" presumes that 1 does not support 3 - rather then B becomes the correct answer on elimination)
Answer is E However no refuting is there in the sentence. The flaw lies in the last part "hottest winters followed by hot summers" - whereas evidence given is "extremes in winter leads to extremes in summer" -
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.