GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 18 Sep 2018, 12:33

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
Current Student
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 180
Location: Ithaca, New York
Schools: Cornell University - The Johnson School
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Sep 2009, 10:43
Quote:
The ability to access information via computer is a tremendous resource for visually impaired people. Only a limited amount of printed information is accessible in braille, large type, or audiotape. But a person with the right hardware and software can access a large quantity of information from libraries and museums around the world, and can have the computer read the information aloud, display it in large type, or produce a braille version. Thus, visually impaired people can now access information from computers more easily than they can from most traditional sources.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

A) A computerized speech synthesizer is often less expensive than a complete library of audiotapes.

B) Relatively easy-to-use computer systems that can read information aloud, display it in large type, or produce a braille version of it are widely available.

C) Many visually impaired people prefer traditional sources of information to computers that can read information aloud, display it in large type, or produce a braille version of it.

D) Most visually impaired people who have access to information via computer also have access to this same information via more traditional sources.

E) The rate at which printed information is converted into formats easily accessible to visually impaired people will increase.
Current Student
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 180
Location: Ithaca, New York
Schools: Cornell University - The Johnson School
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Sep 2009, 10:57
This one will cause some heartburn! :-D

Quote:
Political Scientist: The economies of a number of European countries are currently in severe difficulty. Germany is the only neighboring country that has the resources to resuscitate these economies. Therefore, Germany should begin aiding these economically troubled countries.

Which one of the following principles most helps to justify the political scientist's reasoning?

A) Any nation that alone has an obligation to economically resuscitate neighboring countries ought to be the only nation to provide any economic aid.

B) Any nation that alone has the capacity to economically resuscitate neighboring countries should exercise that capacity.

C) Any nation that can afford to give economic aid to just a few other nations ought to aid just those few.

D) Only nations that alone have the capacity to economically resuscitate neighboring countries should exercise that capacity.

E) Only nations that can afford to give economic aid to just a few other nations ought to aid just those few.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Posts: 9
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Sep 2009, 12:34
i think that the answer is B for both of them.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 22 Jul 2009
Posts: 187
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Sep 2009, 09:50
I agree with the previous poster: B for both.
_________________

Please kudos if my post helps.

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jun 2008
Posts: 502
WE 1: Investment Banking - 6yrs
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Sep 2009, 13:44
Franklin wrote:
This one will cause some heartburn! :-D

Quote:
Political Scientist: The economies of a number of European countries are currently in severe difficulty. Germany is the only neighboring country that has the resources to resuscitate these economies. Therefore, Germany should begin aiding these economically troubled countries.

Which one of the following principles most helps to justify the political scientist's reasoning?

A) Any nation that alone has an obligation to economically resuscitate neighboring countries ought to be the only nation to provide any economic aid.

B) Any nation that alone has the capacity to economically resuscitate neighboring countries should exercise that capacity.

C) Any nation that can afford to give economic aid to just a few other nations ought to aid just those few.

D) Only nations that alone have the capacity to economically resuscitate neighboring countries should exercise that capacity.

E) Only nations that can afford to give economic aid to just a few other nations ought to aid just those few.


I eliminated A,D & E - because of the usage of "only"
Not sure with B & C...on the exam, I'd go with B.
Current Student
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 180
Location: Ithaca, New York
Schools: Cornell University - The Johnson School
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Sep 2009, 18:54
1
Quote:
In addition to the labor and materials used to make wine, the reputation of the vineyard where the grapes originate plays a role in determining the price of the finished wine. Therefore, an expensive wine is not always a good wine.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

A) The price of a bottle of wine should be a reflection of the wine's quality.

B) Price is never an accurate indication of the quality of a bottle of wine.

C) The reputation of a vineyard does not always indicate the quality of its wines.

D) The reputation of a vineyard generally plays a greater role than the quality of its grapes in determining its wines' prices.

E) Wines produced by lesser-known vineyards generally are priced to reflect accurately the wines' quality.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Posts: 9
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Sep 2009, 00:33
In addition to the labor and materials used to make wine, the reputation of the vineyard where the grapes originate plays a role in determining the price of the finished wine. Therefore, an expensive wine is not always a good wine.

i think the answer is C.

Because if the reputation plays a role in determining the price, then the expensive wine must have originated from a reputed vineyard. Also the conclusion states that an expensive wine is not always a good wine. The assumption connecting these two is answer C that the reputation does not mean quality ( here quality is used in place of good wine).
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 22 Jul 2009
Posts: 187
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Sep 2009, 05:34
1
I say C.
_________________

Please kudos if my post helps.

Founder
Founder
User avatar
V
Joined: 04 Dec 2002
Posts: 17362
Location: United States (WA)
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V42
GMAT ToolKit User CAT Tests
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Sep 2009, 21:33
Franklin - just wanted to say - great job!
_________________

Founder of GMAT Club

Just starting out with GMAT? Start here...
OG2019 Directory is here! - New!
Verbal OG2019 Directory is here! - New!

Co-author of the GMAT Club tests

Current Student
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 180
Location: Ithaca, New York
Schools: Cornell University - The Johnson School
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Sep 2009, 05:02
bb wrote:
Franklin - just wanted to say - great job!


Thanks bb! I appreciate your support!

Sorry everyone about not posting for a little while. Midterms are coming up and the workload is kicking my rear end. I'll make it up to you guys by posting a couple every other day or so .... Here we go!

Quote:
Most plants have developed chemical defenses against parasites. The average plant contains about 40 natural pesticides - chemical compounds toxic to bacteria, fungi, and other parasites. Humans ingest these natural pesticides without harm every day. Therefore, the additional threat posed by synthetic pesticides sprayed on crop plants by humans is minimal.

Each of the following, if true, weakens the argument EXCEPT:

A) Humans have been consuming natural plant pesticides from millennia and have had time to adapt to them.

B) The concentrations of natural pesticides in plants are typically much lower than the concentrations of synthetic pesticides in sprayed crop plants.

C) Natural plant pesticides are typically less potent than synthetic pesticides, whose toxicity is highly concentrated.

D) Natural plant pesticides generally serve only as defenses against specific parasites, whereas synthetic pesticides are often harmful to a wide variety of organisms.

E) The synthetic pesticides sprayed on crop plants by humans usually have chemical structures similar to those of the natural pesticides produced by the plants.
Current Student
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 180
Location: Ithaca, New York
Schools: Cornell University - The Johnson School
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Sep 2009, 05:14
3
Remember everyone to please put your reasoning. You don't have to do it for every answer choice just for the answer you choose. This will help everyone reading this thread to see your logic behind the choice.

As you can tell I give out Kudos like they're going out of style. Besides the well-deserved praise from your peers and the blessings from the GMAT gods for posting your reasoning, I may shower you with kudos for your effort ... just a little extra incentive for those who care about that sort of thing! :wink:
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 22 Jul 2009
Posts: 187
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Sep 2009, 17:31
Franklin wrote:
Quote:
Most plants have developed chemical defenses against parasites. The average plant contains about 40 natural pesticides - chemical compounds toxic to bacteria, fungi, and other parasites. Humans ingest these natural pesticides without harm every day. Therefore, the additional threat posed by synthetic pesticides sprayed on crop plants by humans is minimal.

Each of the following, if true, weakens the argument EXCEPT:

A) Humans have been consuming natural plant pesticides from millennia and have had time to adapt to them.

B) The concentrations of natural pesticides in plants are typically much lower than the concentrations of synthetic pesticides in sprayed crop plants.

C) Natural plant pesticides are typically less potent than synthetic pesticides, whose toxicity is highly concentrated.

D) Natural plant pesticides generally serve only as defenses against specific parasites, whereas synthetic pesticides are often harmful to a wide variety of organisms.

E) The synthetic pesticides sprayed on crop plants by humans usually have chemical structures similar to those of the natural pesticides produced by the plants.


Answer E clearly is the only option that does not weaken the argument. In fact, it may even strengthen it.

Sorry Franklin, can't give a better explanation; as with most CR questions on this thread, I found the answers pretty straightforward.

Cheers,
_________________

Please kudos if my post helps.

Current Student
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 180
Location: Ithaca, New York
Schools: Cornell University - The Johnson School
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2009, 03:58
powerka wrote:
Franklin wrote:
Quote:
Most plants have developed chemical defenses against parasites. The average plant contains about 40 natural pesticides - chemical compounds toxic to bacteria, fungi, and other parasites. Humans ingest these natural pesticides without harm every day. Therefore, the additional threat posed by synthetic pesticides sprayed on crop plants by humans is minimal.

Each of the following, if true, weakens the argument EXCEPT:

A) Humans have been consuming natural plant pesticides from millennia and have had time to adapt to them.

B) The concentrations of natural pesticides in plants are typically much lower than the concentrations of synthetic pesticides in sprayed crop plants.

C) Natural plant pesticides are typically less potent than synthetic pesticides, whose toxicity is highly concentrated.

D) Natural plant pesticides generally serve only as defenses against specific parasites, whereas synthetic pesticides are often harmful to a wide variety of organisms.

E) The synthetic pesticides sprayed on crop plants by humans usually have chemical structures similar to those of the natural pesticides produced by the plants.


Answer E clearly is the only option that does not weaken the argument. In fact, it may even strengthen it.

Sorry Franklin, can't give a better explanation; as with most CR questions on this thread, I found the answers pretty straightforward.

Cheers,


No sweat!
Current Student
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 180
Location: Ithaca, New York
Schools: Cornell University - The Johnson School
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2009, 04:10
The Law School Admission Council created this question back in 2003-4 ... I thought the question to be quite prophetic!

Quote:
The economy is doing badly. First, the real estate slump has been with us for some time. Second, car sales are at their lowest in years. Of course, had either one or the other phenomenon failed to occur, this would be consistent with the economy as a whole being healthy. But, their occurrence together makes it quite probable that my conclusion is correct.

Which one of the following inferences is most strongly supported by the information above?

A) If car sales are at their lowest in years, then it is likely that the economy is doing badly.

B) If the economy is doing badly, then either the real estate market or the car sales market is not healthy.

C) If the real estate market is healthy, then it is likely that the economy as a whole is healthy.

D) If the economy is in a healthy state, then it is unlikely that the real estate and car sales markets are both in a slump.

E) The bad condition of the economy implies that both the real estate and the car sales markets are doing badly.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Posts: 9
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2009, 04:38
A) If car sales are at their lowest in years, then it is likely that the economy is doing badly.

B) If the economy is doing badly, then either the real estate market or the car sales market is not healthy.

C) If the real estate market is healthy, then it is likely that the economy as a whole is healthy.

D) If the economy is in a healthy state, then it is unlikely that the real estate and car sales markets are both in a slump.

E) The bad condition of the economy implies that both the real estate and the car sales markets are doing badly.

i think the answer is D. Because it is saying that if either of the phenomenon ( real estate slump or car sales being lowest) failed to occur then the economy would have been in a healthy state. from this we can infer that if the economy is in a healthy state then it is unlikely that both the phenomenon occured.
Current Student
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
Posts: 180
Location: Ithaca, New York
Schools: Cornell University - The Johnson School
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2009, 05:07
2
One more for today ...

Quote:
It is highly likely that Claudette is a classical pianist. Like most classical pianists, Claudette recognizes many of Clara Schumann's works. The vast majority of people who are not classical pianists do not. In fact, many people who are not classical pianists have not even heard of Clara Schumann.

The reasoning in the argument above is flawed in that it

A) ignores the possibility that Claudette is more familiar with the works of other composers of music for piano.

B) presumes, without providing justification, that people who have not heard of Clara Schumann do not recognize her works.

C) presumes, without providing justification, that classical pianists cannot also play other musical instruments.

D) relies for its plausibility on the vagueness of the term "classical."

E) ignores the possibility that the majority of people who recognize many of Clara Schumann's works are not classical pianists.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Posts: 111
Location: France
GPA: 3.95
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2009, 05:23
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 22 Jul 2009
Posts: 187
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2009, 06:37
1
Franklin wrote:
Quote:
The economy is doing badly. First, the real estate slump has been with us for some time. Second, car sales are at their lowest in years. Of course, had either one or the other phenomenon failed to occur, this would be consistent with the economy as a whole being healthy. But, their occurrence together makes it quite probable that my conclusion is correct.

Which one of the following inferences is most strongly supported by the information above?

A) If car sales are at their lowest in years, then it is likely that the economy is doing badly.
B) If the economy is doing badly, then either the real estate market or the car sales market is not healthy.
C) If the real estate market is healthy, then it is likely that the economy as a whole is healthy.
D) If the economy is in a healthy state, then it is unlikely that the real estate and car sales markets are both in a slump.
E) The bad condition of the economy implies that both the real estate and the car sales markets are doing badly.


Most difficult CR question I've seen in a long time. C, D and E could all be the answers.

Statement says:

-> Information accepted as correct by the speaker:
1. Healthy Real Estate => Healthy Economy
2. Healthy Car Sales => Healthy Economy
3. Healthy Real Estate & Healthy Car Sales => Healthy Economy
-> Present conditions: Unhealthy Real Estate + Unhealthy Car Sales
-> Assumption: Healthy Economy + Unhealthy Economy = 1
-> Conclusion: The economy is doing badly

Lets analyze answer choices C, D and E.

E) The bad condition of the economy implies that both the real estate and the car sales markets are doing badly.
-> Unhealthy Economy => Unhealthy Real Estate & Unhealthy Car Sales.
-> The speaker doesn't know that the economy is doing badly, but rather concludes that it is doing badly based on Unhealthy Real Estate & Unhealthy Car Sales. Incorrect.

D) If the economy is in a healthy state, then it is unlikely that the real estate and car sales markets are both in a slump.
-> If Healthy Economy => Healthy Real Estate AND/OR Healthy Car Sales

C) If the real estate market is healthy, then it is likely that the economy as a whole is healthy.
-> If Healthy Real Estate => Healthy Economy

D and C are both correct.

I go for D as I interpret D to be an inference while I interpret C to be a rephrasing of the question stem.

OA?
_________________

Please kudos if my post helps.

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 21 May 2009
Posts: 104
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2009, 06:40
The economy is doing badly. First, the real estate slump has been with us for some time. Second, car sales are at their lowest in years. Of course, had either one or the other phenomenon failed to occur, this would be consistent with the economy as a whole being healthy. But, their occurrence together makes it quite probable that my conclusion is correct.

Which one of the following inferences is most strongly supported by the information above?

A) If car sales are at their lowest in years, then it is likely that the economy is doing badly.

B) If the economy is doing badly, then either the real estate market or the car sales market is not healthy.

C) If the real estate market is healthy, then it is likely that the economy as a whole is healthy.

D) If the economy is in a healthy state, then it is unlikely that the real estate and car sales markets are both in a slump.

E) The bad condition of the economy implies that both the real estate and the car sales markets are doing badly.


will go with D for this Q plz post the OA also
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 22 Jul 2009
Posts: 187
Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 29 Sep 2009, 06:58
Franklin wrote:
Quote:
It is highly likely that Claudette is a classical pianist. Like most classical pianists, Claudette recognizes many of Clara Schumann's works. The vast majority of people who are not classical pianists do not. In fact, many people who are not classical pianists have not even heard of Clara Schumann.

The reasoning in the argument above is flawed in that it

A) ignores the possibility that Claudette is more familiar with the works of other composers of music for piano.
[b]PK: OUT OF SCOPE


B) presumes, without providing justification, that people who have not heard of Clara Schumann do not recognize her works.
"PK: HOW COULD PERSON X RECOGNIZE THE WORK OF SOMEONE OF WHOSE EXISTENCE PERSON X IS NOT EVEN AWARE OF? ANSWER: COULD NOT, ITS IMPOSSIBLE. THEREFORE SAYING "that people who have not heard of Clara Schumann do not recognize her works" IS JUST LOGICAL; IT IS A WEIGHTLESS STATEMENT, AND ITS PRESUMPTION IS NOT ONLY NOT INCORRECT BUT ALSO NOT RELATED TO THE ARGUMENT."

C) presumes, without providing justification, that classical pianists cannot also play other musical instruments.
PK: OUT OF SCOPE

D) relies for its plausibility on the vagueness of the term "classical."
PK: TERM CLASSICAL IS NOT NECESSARILY VAGUE

E) ignores the possibility that the majority of people who recognize many of Clara Schumann's works are not classical pianists.
PK: THIS IS THE BEST ANSWER. ITS STATISTICAL PLAUSIBILITY CANT BE DENIED. STILL, I DONT WHY IGNORING THAT POSSIBILITY MAKES THE ARGUMENT FLAWED

[/b]


Sorry for the caps. Wanted to use colors to highlight my comments, but did not see the option on the side till after finishing writing. I say E. OA?
_________________

Please kudos if my post helps.

Re: Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread &nbs [#permalink] 29 Sep 2009, 06:58

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8    Next  [ 150 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

Franklin's Super-Fly Critical Reasoning Question Thread

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Moderators: GMATNinja, GMATNinjaTwo

Events & Promotions

PREV
NEXT


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.