serbiano wrote:
OA is E.
This is one of the greatest Method of Reasoning questions of all time. First take a close look at the statements made by Jane and Mark. In the majority of GMAT questions with two speakers—one identifiably male and the other identifiably female—the male makes a mistake or an error of reasoning and the female uses sound reasoning. This does not occur in every problem, but it occurs enough to be more than random. Why? The thinking goes that in order for GMAC to protect themselves against accusations that they are biased against women, they create problems where the male is clearly the one using faulty reasoning. Jane’s position: Jane concludes that Professor Harper’s ideas are valueless because there is no way to evaluate a guitar sound and determine what constitutes a better-sounding guitar. Mark’s position: Mark also agrees that Professor Harper’s ideas are valueless, but Mark’s reasoning is that if Harper’s ideas really worked, then they would have been adopted by now. In making this analysis, Mark reveals that he believes there is a way to determine that one guitar sounds better than another. Like all GMAT questions, you must lock down the exact nature of the premises and conclusions! Mark’s initial comment of “What’s more” leads most people to believe he is in complete agreement with Jane. Yes, he agrees with her conclusion, but his reason for doing so is completely contrary to Jane’s reason. Mark actually misinterprets Jane’s claim, and this is why he says “What’s more,” as if he is adding an additional piece of information that supports her position. He is not; the premise that he uses contradicts Jane’s premises. If you simply accept “What’s more” to mean that he is in complete agreement with Jane, you will most certainly miss the question, and have no idea you have done so. The problem becomes even more challenging because the answer choices are brilliantly constructed:
Answer choice (A): Mark does not address a weakness in Jane’s argument or show how one could be overcome. Do not mistake the use of “What’s more” to automatically mean that he is adding something helpful to the situation.
Answer choice (B): This is an answer chosen by many people, and it has Shell game aspects. Mark’s argument does not have a premise in common with Jane’s argument; rather, Mark’s argument has the conclusion in common with Jane’s argument. Before you select this answer, use the Fact Test and ask yourself, “Which premise do the two arguments have in common?” You won’t be able to find one, and that would instantly disprove the answer.
Answer choice (C): This is a very clever Reverse Answer choice. The answer states: “Mark and Jane use similar techniques to argue for different conclusions.” In fact, the following happens in the stimulus: “Mark and Jane use different techniques to argue for similar conclusions.” If you had any doubt that the makers of the GMAT put the same amount of work into the wrong answers as the correct answers, this answer choice should be convince you that they do.
Answer choice (D): An argument is the sum of the premises and conclusion. Although Mark restates Jane’s conclusion, he does not restate her premises. Therefore, he does not restate her argument and this answer is incorrect.
Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer. As discussed in the argument analysis, Jane believes that there is no way to evaluate the merit of a guitar’s sounds. On the opposite side, Mark’s response indicates he believes that there is a way to evaluate the merit of a guitar’s sound (“because of the improvement it makes in tonal quality”) and thus the two have conflicting positions. This is another great example of a separator question: one that scorers in a certain range will get and scorers in a lower range will not get.
This is also a dangerous question because many people think they have chosen the correct answer when in fact they have missed it. The lesson here is that you must be an active, prepared reader. Do not allow yourself to be lured by Mark’s comment of “What’s more” into believing that he automatically is in agreement with Jane. The test makers use that phrase to see if you will read closely enough to discern his real argument or if you will simply gloss over his comments on the basis of how they are introduced. The GMAT always makes you pay if you gloss over any section of a stimulus.
I completely agree with you on this but the word supposition indicates that Mark has no basis for his theory of conclusion but he does?
Can you shed some light over the same.
Thankyou.