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.
Apr 1612:00 PM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
You’re first to know: Save $200 on GMAT prep starting tomorrow, 4/13. Get 6 official practice tests and study with real questions. Be ready to save!
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
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
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
30 Jun 2025, 08:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
95%
(hard)
Question Stats:
28% (01:51) correct
72%
(02:01)
wrong
based on 797
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Civil Engineer: Trade between the northern and southern cities of our state has stagnated greatly. There are few reliable methods of transporting goods between these two groups of cities, so in order to spur economic growth in this state, we must build a freeway system, connecting the two groups of cities, that passes no more than five miles away from each city.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the civil engineer’s reasoning?
A. Building a freeway system that passes as much as ten miles from each city would be sufficient to greatly increase trade between the northern and southern cities of the state.
B. There are other, more important causes for the lack of trade between the northern and southern cities of the state in addition to a lack of reliable methods of transporting goods between these two groups of cities.
C. The state’s infrastructure budget is not currently large enough to finance the construction of a freeway system.
D. Growth in the commercial traffic between two groups of cities is most often associated with the closeness of the transportation system with the cities.
E. The reliability of existing methods of transporting goods between the northern and southern cities of the state can be improved to some extent without building a freeway system
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the civil engineer’s reasoning?
A. Building a freeway system that passes as much as ten miles from each city would be sufficient to greatly increase trade between the northern and southern cities of the state.
B. There are other, more important causes for the lack of trade between the northern and southern cities of the state in addition to a lack of reliable methods of transporting goods between these two groups of cities.
C. The state’s infrastructure budget is not currently large enough to finance the construction of a freeway system.
D. Growth in the commercial traffic between two groups of cities is most often associated with the closeness of the transportation system with the cities.
E. The reliability of existing methods of transporting goods between the northern and southern cities of the state can be improved to some extent without building a freeway system
|
30 Jun 2025, 08:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
Bunuel
Experts' Global Explanation:
Mind-map: Civil Engineer: Trade between two groups of cities in state has stagnated à two groups of cities lack reliable methods of transporting goods between them à freeway system, passing no more than five miles away from each city, must be built between the two groups to spur economic growth (conclusion)
Missing-link: Between the two groups of cities lacking reliable methods of transporting goods between them and the conclusion that a freeway system, passing no more than five miles away from each city, must be built between the two groups to spur economic growth
Expectation from the correct answer choice: To weaken the conclusion that a freeway system, passing no more than five miles away from each city, must be built between the two groups to spur economic growth
Note: This question seeks an answer choice that "most seriously weakens" the argument; such questions often represent a common GMAT dilemma of choosing the “best answer choice” among multiple "good answer choices"; in such a scenario, you need to analyze the options closely and proceed with one that "most" weakens the argument.
A. Correct. By suggesting that a freeway system “passing ten miles” away from each city is sufficient to increase trade, this answer choice casts doubt on the necessity of a freeway system passing “no more than five miles” away from each city, thus weakening the conclusion. Because this answer choice weakens the argument, this answer choice is correct.
B. Trap. This answer choice, suggesting that there are other, more important causes for the lack of trade between the two groups of cities, indicates that other, more significant solutions “in addition to” the proposed solution of building the freeway system may be necessary; the term “in addition to” indicates that the answer choice acknowledges the importance of the proposed solution and that the answer choice does not suggest that the proposed solution would not be effective; so, this answer choice, at best, only faintly weakens the argument; this is too weak an option to be the correct answer and shall eventually make way for a better, stronger choice; we have a more convincing answer choice in A.
C. The argument is concerned with whether the suggested freeway system must be built to spur economic growth; so, whether there is enough budget to build the freeway system is simply additional information, which, although relevant to the broad context of the argument, does not weaken the conclusion. Because this answer choice does not weaken the conclusion, this answer choice is incorrect.
D. Trap. This answer choice, suggesting that commercial traffic among cities would increase if the road transportation system is closer to the cities, indicates a merit in the proposed solution of building a freeway system that passes no more than five miles away from each city; so, this answer choice strengthens, rather than weakens, the conclusion that such a freeway system must be built to spur economic growth. Because this answer choice does not weaken the argument, this answer choice is incorrect.
E. Trap. If the reliability of existing transportation methods can be improved, it casts doubt on the necessity of building a freeway system; however, the usage of “to some extent” is subjective and so, this answer choice, at best, only marginally weakens the conclusion; this answer choice can stay after the first glance but shall eventually make way for a better, stronger answer choice; we have a more convincing answer choice in A.
A is the best choice.
General Discussion
30 Jun 2025, 08:13
Kudos
Bookmarks
Premise: Trade between northern and southern cities has stagnated. The cause is the lack of reliable methods of transportation.
Conclusion: To spur economic growth, we must build a freeway system that passes no more than five miles away from each city.
We are asked to find the option that most seriously weakens the reasoning.
That means we want a statement that shows:
Either the freeway is not necessary,
Or something else could solve the problem better,
Or the “5-mile distance” condition is unnecessary or irrelevant,
Or that the assumed cause (transportation issues) is not the actual or primary cause.
Option A:
Building a freeway system that passes as much as ten miles from each city would be sufficient to greatly increase trade between the northern and southern cities of the state.
This directly undermines the specific recommendation that it must be “within five miles.”
If a freeway 10 miles away is sufficient, then the added cost/effort to meet the 5-mile requirement may not be justified.
🔥 Strongly weakens the necessity of the proposed plan.
✅ Contender
Option B:
There are other, more important causes for the lack of trade between the northern and southern cities of the state in addition to a lack of reliable methods of transporting goods between these two groups of cities.
This challenges the causal assumption: That transport is the main issue.
If other, more important causes exist, then the freeway may not effectively solve the problem.
🔥 Strongly weakens the argument by undercutting the causal reasoning.
✅ Contender
Option C:
The state’s infrastructure budget is not currently large enough to finance the construction of a freeway system.
This brings in a practical constraint (budget), but does not directly weaken the reasoning behind why the freeway should be built.
It challenges feasibility, not the logic of the plan.
❌ Not a strong weakness of the reasoning itself — more of a financial barrier.
🚫 Eliminate
Option D:
Growth in the commercial traffic between two groups of cities is most often associated with the closeness of the transportation system with the cities.
This actually strengthens the reasoning — that closeness of the freeway helps trade.
❌ This supports, not weakens, the argument.
🚫 Eliminate
Option E:
The reliability of existing methods of transporting goods between the northern and southern cities of the state can be improved to some extent without building a freeway system.
This offers an alternative solution — improve current methods.
It weakens the idea that a new freeway is necessary, though it doesn’t fully negate the argument (depends on how much trade improves).
✅ Mild to moderate weakening — suggests freeway may not be the only/best solution.
✅ Still a weaker contender than A or B.
✅ Best Answer: A
Because it directly challenges the necessity of the specific “within 5 miles” freeway, showing that a less extreme (10-mile) version can achieve the same goal — thus undermining the core recommendation most precisely.
Final Answer: A ✅
Conclusion: To spur economic growth, we must build a freeway system that passes no more than five miles away from each city.
We are asked to find the option that most seriously weakens the reasoning.
That means we want a statement that shows:
Either the freeway is not necessary,
Or something else could solve the problem better,
Or the “5-mile distance” condition is unnecessary or irrelevant,
Or that the assumed cause (transportation issues) is not the actual or primary cause.
Option A:
Building a freeway system that passes as much as ten miles from each city would be sufficient to greatly increase trade between the northern and southern cities of the state.
This directly undermines the specific recommendation that it must be “within five miles.”
If a freeway 10 miles away is sufficient, then the added cost/effort to meet the 5-mile requirement may not be justified.
🔥 Strongly weakens the necessity of the proposed plan.
✅ Contender
Option B:
There are other, more important causes for the lack of trade between the northern and southern cities of the state in addition to a lack of reliable methods of transporting goods between these two groups of cities.
This challenges the causal assumption: That transport is the main issue.
If other, more important causes exist, then the freeway may not effectively solve the problem.
🔥 Strongly weakens the argument by undercutting the causal reasoning.
✅ Contender
Option C:
The state’s infrastructure budget is not currently large enough to finance the construction of a freeway system.
This brings in a practical constraint (budget), but does not directly weaken the reasoning behind why the freeway should be built.
It challenges feasibility, not the logic of the plan.
❌ Not a strong weakness of the reasoning itself — more of a financial barrier.
🚫 Eliminate
Option D:
Growth in the commercial traffic between two groups of cities is most often associated with the closeness of the transportation system with the cities.
This actually strengthens the reasoning — that closeness of the freeway helps trade.
❌ This supports, not weakens, the argument.
🚫 Eliminate
Option E:
The reliability of existing methods of transporting goods between the northern and southern cities of the state can be improved to some extent without building a freeway system.
This offers an alternative solution — improve current methods.
It weakens the idea that a new freeway is necessary, though it doesn’t fully negate the argument (depends on how much trade improves).
✅ Mild to moderate weakening — suggests freeway may not be the only/best solution.
✅ Still a weaker contender than A or B.
✅ Best Answer: A
Because it directly challenges the necessity of the specific “within 5 miles” freeway, showing that a less extreme (10-mile) version can achieve the same goal — thus undermining the core recommendation most precisely.
Final Answer: A ✅
