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 1811:00 AM PST
-12:00 PM PST
Join us in a live GMAT practice session and solve 30 challenging GMAT questions with other test takers in timed conditions, covering GMAT Quant, Data Sufficiency, Data Insights, Reading Comprehension, and Critical Reasoning questions.
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.
10 Jul 2024, 11:43
Kudos
Bookmarks
If a factory emits pollutants above a certain level, it must install an advanced filtration system.
Therefore, if a factory has not installed such a system, it must be emitting pollutants below the required level.
This reasoning is flawed because it assumes that the only reason a factory would not install an advanced filtration system is if it is emitting pollutants below the required level. However, there could be other reasons why a factory hasn't installed the system (e.g., non-compliance, evasion of regulations, lack of enforcement).
The flaw here is a mistaken contrapositive, or assuming that the absence of an action (installing a filtration system) implies the absence of a condition (emitting pollutants above the required level).
Similar Flaws in Answer Choices:
A. Any animal classified as a reptile must be cold-blooded, so if an animal is not cold-blooded, it cannot be classified as a reptile.
This is valid reasoning. It correctly applies the contrapositive.
B. All licensed drivers must pass a driving test, and since Jorge has passed a driving test, he must be a licensed driver.
This is flawed but not in the same way. Passing a driving test is a necessary but not sufficient condition for being a licensed driver. There could be other requirements.
C. A person who is an elected official must reside in the district they represent, so anyone who does not reside in a particular district cannot be an elected official there.
This is valid reasoning. It correctly applies the contrapositive.
D. Every person entering the country must go through customs; therefore, the increase in the number of customs agents will necessarily lead to a decrease in the number of people entering the country.
This is flawed reasoning, but it’s not the same type of flaw. It assumes causation between two unrelated events.
E. All professional athletes must undergo regular drug testing; hence, if someone has not undergone drug testing, they must not be a professional athlete.
This exhibits the same flaw as the original argument. It assumes that the only reason someone wouldn't undergo drug testing is that they are not a professional athlete, ignoring other possible reasons for not undergoing testing.
Correct Answer:E
Therefore, if a factory has not installed such a system, it must be emitting pollutants below the required level.
This reasoning is flawed because it assumes that the only reason a factory would not install an advanced filtration system is if it is emitting pollutants below the required level. However, there could be other reasons why a factory hasn't installed the system (e.g., non-compliance, evasion of regulations, lack of enforcement).
The flaw here is a mistaken contrapositive, or assuming that the absence of an action (installing a filtration system) implies the absence of a condition (emitting pollutants above the required level).
Similar Flaws in Answer Choices:
A. Any animal classified as a reptile must be cold-blooded, so if an animal is not cold-blooded, it cannot be classified as a reptile.
This is valid reasoning. It correctly applies the contrapositive.
B. All licensed drivers must pass a driving test, and since Jorge has passed a driving test, he must be a licensed driver.
This is flawed but not in the same way. Passing a driving test is a necessary but not sufficient condition for being a licensed driver. There could be other requirements.
C. A person who is an elected official must reside in the district they represent, so anyone who does not reside in a particular district cannot be an elected official there.
This is valid reasoning. It correctly applies the contrapositive.
D. Every person entering the country must go through customs; therefore, the increase in the number of customs agents will necessarily lead to a decrease in the number of people entering the country.
This is flawed reasoning, but it’s not the same type of flaw. It assumes causation between two unrelated events.
E. All professional athletes must undergo regular drug testing; hence, if someone has not undergone drug testing, they must not be a professional athlete.
This exhibits the same flaw as the original argument. It assumes that the only reason someone wouldn't undergo drug testing is that they are not a professional athlete, ignoring other possible reasons for not undergoing testing.
Correct Answer:E
10 Jul 2024, 11:48
Kudos
Bookmarks
Since new environmental regulations were enacted last year, factories emitting pollutants above a certain level must install advanced filtration systems. Therefore, any factory that has not installed such a system since last year must be emitting pollutants below the required level.
The reasoning above exhibits a flaw similar to one in which of the following?
A. Any animal classified as a reptile must be cold-blooded, so if an animal is not cold-blooded, it cannot be classified as a reptile.
B. All licensed drivers must pass a driving test, and since Jorge has passed a driving test, he must be a licensed driver.
C. A person who is an elected official must reside in the district they represent, so anyone who does not reside in a particular district cannot be an elected official there.
D. Every person entering the country must go through customs; therefore, the increase in the number of customs agents will necessarily lead to a decrease in the number of people entering the country.
E. All professional athletes must undergo regular drug testing; hence, if someone has not undergone drug testing, they must not be a professional athlete.
E. is the correct answer, as the argument's flaw is that it assumes that all factories that emit pollution higher than the certain level have installed advanced filtration systems already; similarly the statement E assumes that all athletes have undergone drug testing.
The reasoning above exhibits a flaw similar to one in which of the following?
A. Any animal classified as a reptile must be cold-blooded, so if an animal is not cold-blooded, it cannot be classified as a reptile.
B. All licensed drivers must pass a driving test, and since Jorge has passed a driving test, he must be a licensed driver.
C. A person who is an elected official must reside in the district they represent, so anyone who does not reside in a particular district cannot be an elected official there.
D. Every person entering the country must go through customs; therefore, the increase in the number of customs agents will necessarily lead to a decrease in the number of people entering the country.
E. All professional athletes must undergo regular drug testing; hence, if someone has not undergone drug testing, they must not be a professional athlete.
E. is the correct answer, as the argument's flaw is that it assumes that all factories that emit pollution higher than the certain level have installed advanced filtration systems already; similarly the statement E assumes that all athletes have undergone drug testing.
pranjalshah
Joined: 11 Dec 2023
Last visit: 10 Nov 2025
Posts: 101
Given Kudos: 202
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, General Management
Schools: ISB '27 (A$$$$)
GMAT Focus 1: 735 Q90 V87 DI82 
10 Jul 2024, 12:37
Kudos
Bookmarks
The reasoning in the given statement follows this structure:
1. Factories emitting pollutants above a certain level must install advanced filtration systems (If A, then B).
2. Therefore, any factory that has not installed such a system must be emitting pollutants below the required level (If not B, then not A).
It incorrectly assumes that if the consequence (installing filtration systems) is not true, then the precursor (emitting pollutants above a certain level) must not be true.
A. Any animal classified as a reptile must be cold-blooded, so if an animal is not cold-blooded, it cannot be classified as a reptile.
- This reasoning is valid: If all reptiles are cold-blooded (If A, then B), then an animal not being cold-blooded (not B) means it cannot be a reptile (not A).
B. All licensed drivers must pass a driving test, and since Jorge has passed a driving test, he must be a licensed driver.
- This is an example of affirming the consequence, not the opposite way.
C. A person who is an elected official must reside in the district they represent, so anyone who does not reside in a particular district cannot be an elected official there.
- This reasoning is valid: If being an elected official (A) requires residing in the district (B), then not residing in the district (not B) means one cannot be an elected official (not A).
D. Every person entering the country must go through customs; therefore, the increase in the number of customs agents will necessarily lead to a decrease in the number of people entering the country.
- This reasoning is not directly related to the given structure. It makes an assumption about the effect of more customs agents on the number of people entering the country.
E. All professional athletes must undergo regular drug testing; hence, if someone has not undergone drug testing, they must not be a professional athlete.
- This reasoning is similar to the original argument. It states: If someone is a professional athlete (A), they must undergo regular drug testing (B). If someone has not undergone drug testing (not B), they must not be a professional athlete (not A). This follows the same flawed logic of denying the antecedent.
The correct answer is:
E. All professional athletes must undergo regular drug testing; hence, if someone has not undergone drug testing, they must not be a professional athlete.
1. Factories emitting pollutants above a certain level must install advanced filtration systems (If A, then B).
2. Therefore, any factory that has not installed such a system must be emitting pollutants below the required level (If not B, then not A).
It incorrectly assumes that if the consequence (installing filtration systems) is not true, then the precursor (emitting pollutants above a certain level) must not be true.
A. Any animal classified as a reptile must be cold-blooded, so if an animal is not cold-blooded, it cannot be classified as a reptile.
- This reasoning is valid: If all reptiles are cold-blooded (If A, then B), then an animal not being cold-blooded (not B) means it cannot be a reptile (not A).
B. All licensed drivers must pass a driving test, and since Jorge has passed a driving test, he must be a licensed driver.
- This is an example of affirming the consequence, not the opposite way.
C. A person who is an elected official must reside in the district they represent, so anyone who does not reside in a particular district cannot be an elected official there.
- This reasoning is valid: If being an elected official (A) requires residing in the district (B), then not residing in the district (not B) means one cannot be an elected official (not A).
D. Every person entering the country must go through customs; therefore, the increase in the number of customs agents will necessarily lead to a decrease in the number of people entering the country.
- This reasoning is not directly related to the given structure. It makes an assumption about the effect of more customs agents on the number of people entering the country.
E. All professional athletes must undergo regular drug testing; hence, if someone has not undergone drug testing, they must not be a professional athlete.
- This reasoning is similar to the original argument. It states: If someone is a professional athlete (A), they must undergo regular drug testing (B). If someone has not undergone drug testing (not B), they must not be a professional athlete (not A). This follows the same flawed logic of denying the antecedent.
The correct answer is:
E. All professional athletes must undergo regular drug testing; hence, if someone has not undergone drug testing, they must not be a professional athlete.
