Harry Trevalga: You and your publication have unfairly discriminated

Question

Harry Trevalga: You and your publication have unfairly discriminated against my poems. I have submitted thirty poems in the last two years and you have not published any of them! It is all because I won the Fenner Poetry Award two years ago and your poetry editor thought she deserved it.

Publisher: Ridiculous! Our editorial policy and practice is perfectly fair, since our poetry editor judges all submissions for publication without ever seeing the names of the poets, and hence cannot possibly have known who wrote your poems.

The publisher makes which one of the following assumptions in replying to Trevalga's charges of unfair discrimination?

(A) The poetry editor does not bear a grudge against Harry Trevalga for his winning the Fenner Poetry Award.

(B) It is not unusual for poets to contribute many poems to the publisher's publication without ever having any accepted for publication.

(C) The poetry editor cannot recognize the poems submitted by Harry Trevalga as his unless Trevalga's name is attached to them.

(D) The poetry editor's decisions on which poems to publish are not based strictly on judgments of intrinsic merit.

(E) Harry Trevalga submitted his poems to the publisher's publication under his pen name.

generis · Accepted Answer

adkikani  , wow, this question is huge!
Re highlight, I am glad to see that there is no outside elaboration creeping in. I assume the words you underlined also figure into your understanding of the conclusion.

I use the negation technique only if there are two answers between which I cannot decide. But if you like negation and you are reasonably fast at it, I think it's okay to use here. IMO necessary-sufficient techniques involve too many double negatives in this case.

I will lay out the meaning- and gap- based approach I used before I discuss negation and necessary-sufficient analysis.

Meaning- and logical gap-based approach

What does this publisher's conclusion-reply mean?

No name on the poem = editor cannot identify author = editor cannot be prejudiced against an unknown author = publishing house and methods are fair = no unfair discrimination against Harry

That rendition is huge. Too huge. To make the argument more manageable I ask,

"What logical gap exists? Which reasoning is faulty? Which connection among the above connections is too extreme, too speculative, too short-sighted, or too  stupid  if I just think about it for a moment?"

Look carefully at the "equals" signs. The last three have logic that is pretty clean and not stupid.

This one, however, is extreme, short-sighted, and stupid:  No name on the poem = editor cannot recognize author

Stripped down: a visible name on a poem is the one and only way to recognize the author of a poem.

Nonsense. A poet can be recognized by a distinctive voice. (Neruda. Shakespeare. Dickinson.)

Think about a distinctive singing voice such as Adele's. If Adele puts out a new song on the radio, we identify the singer as Adele before the DJ names her because Adele's voice is distinctive.

Extrapolate. Good poets and artists of all kinds have a creative, idiosyncratic, and frequently recognizable  style  or "signature."

Assuming that there is only one way to identify the author of a poem is extreme.

As a result, if even ONE alternative way to identify the author of a poem is possible, then the claim that "only names identify" is false. "ONLY" is not only.

The editor could easily recognize Harry's poems in another way. She could recognize Harry's distinctive style and voice in his poems.*

The publisher's reply logic hinges on the presence of names as the ONLY way to identify a poet (note the word "hence" in the publisher's conclusion). We need an option that mentions something about poems, names, identification of poems' authors, and the editor.

The publisher assumes that. . .

(C) The poetry editor cannot recognize the poems submitted by Harry Trevalga as his unless Trevalga's name is attached to them.

Bingo. The publisher assumes that names are the ONE and ONLY way that the editor can recognize Harry's poetry.

That assumption is unwarranted. It is faulty. As a result, the conclusion is logically flawed.

The assumption that the publisher makes in reply to Harry is

Answer C

Negation

Negating (C)? "Unless" is usually negated with "even if." Negation in this case is not simple.

(C) NEGATED: The poetry editor CAN recognize the poems submitted by Harry Trevalga as his EVEN IF Trevalga's name is NOT attached to them.

Test this negated assumption. What happens to the conclusion?

The conclusion: Harry, you are incorrect about unfairness. When the editor reviews poems she never sees the authors' names. She cannot know who writes your poems  .

With (C) negated, the conclusion is demolished. Negated (C) says that the editor CAN recognize Harry's poetry without a name. She CAN know who writes Harry's poems.

If the editor CAN recognize Harry's poems without his name per (C) negated, then she CAN discriminate against him. The publisher's conclusion just got eviscerated.

Answer C

Necessary / sufficient

Fair warning disclaimer: I do not think this analysis is a great idea. This approach is very nuanced. Further, double negatives in this case make this approach very dense. 
 
"Unless" indicates a necessary condition.

X = recognize an author = Sufficient
Y = editor sees a name = Necessary

E cannot do X unless Y
E cannot do X without Y
E can do X only if Y

We need to show that the necessary condition is not actually necessary.

Stated differently, we must find a way to show that the sufficient condition can happen even if the necessary condition does not happen.

Attack the necessary condition. Find a way for the sufficient condition to occur without the occurrence of the necessary condition.

The conclusion insists that the editor cannot identify Harry's poems because she cannot see his name on his poems. Names are the necessary condition for the sufficient condition of recognizing Harry as the author of his poems.

Is there another way that the editor can recognize Harry's poems without seeing his name?

If there is another way, then the allegedly necessary names are ... not necessary.

More directly (and rarely as obvious in LR questions as C is in this one): is it true that names are the only way to identify a poet?

If negated (see above), Answer C says that the editor CAN recognize Harry's poems without seeing Harry's name.

We do not know exactly what constitutes the alternative way to identify a poet. But negated C tells us that names are not the only way to identify a poet. "Not the only way" absolutely implies that there is another way.

If C is negated, names are not necessary.

Hence the sufficient condition CAN occur (authors of poems can be identified) 
EVEN IF the allegedly necessary condition (a visible name) does not occur 
(even if there are no names).

Negated answered (C) gives us the sufficient condition  without  the "necessary" condition. The allegedly necessary condition is not actually necessary.

And that not-actually-necessary condition is what the publisher assumed in reply to Harry.

Answer C

Hope that helps.

**For example, maybe he only uses titles with one word and always hides a reference to nature in his poetry.

What if the editor sees a poem with a one-word title and a sneaky reference to nature? Answer: she could almost certainly identify Harry.

We do not have to provide any specific examples or prove that she can identify him. We just have to identify an alternative to show that names are not the only way to identify a poet.

Bunuel · Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

(A) No. Whether the editor bears a grudge against Mr. Trevalga is irrelevant since the publisher implies that the editor does not know whose poems she is reviewing.

(B) No. The publisher’s argument is based on the method of review, not on the quantity of submissions.

(C) Yes.  The publisher states that the editor does not know the names of the authors whose poems she reviews. From this the publisher concludes that the editor does not know whose poems she is reviewing. This assumes that the editor cannot identify the poems of Mr. Trevalga by other means such as their style, handwriting, length, etc.

(D) No. This is not an assumption of the publisher. In fact, it could strengthen Mr. Trevalga’s claim since the implication of his claim is that his poems were rejected because of a grudge, not because of their merit.

(E) No. According to the publisher, whether Mr. Trevalga used his real name or a pen name is irrelevant since the editor does not see the names.

OldFritz · Answer

The publisher's argument is based on the premise that the editor cannot see any submitter's name therefore cannot discriminate against anyone. However, if there is a way by which the editor can recognize a particular author (maybe style of writing, verse arrangement, etc) then that means that discrimination can still occur and Trevelga may be right in his accusation.

C is the right answer, because it raises the possibilty that the editor may be able to single out Trevelga's poem for discrimination even if his name is not on the poem
Negating C even makes this clearer, since it rips to smithereens the editor's "no name, therefore fair selection" argument.

gmatfighter12 · Answer

This one is a clear C. The editor did not know which poems belong to the author to discriminate against.

And I dont think Its an 700 question.

tuanquang269 · Answer

Choice C is clearly correct. 
Reply of publisher = Poetry editor jodges all submissions for publication without names of the poets => He/She cannot possibly have known the name of the poet.

Negate techniques:
(A) The poet editor BEAR a grudge against Harry Trevalga for his winning the Fenner Poetry Award. => this is the same side with the comment of the Poet. But the center information is that the rely of Publisher
(B) It is UNUSUAL for poets to contribute many poems to the publisher's publication without ever having any accepted for publication. => irrelevant to the reply of the Publisher
(C) The poetry editor CAN recognize the poems submitted by Harry Trevalga as his unless Trevalga name is attached to them. => the reply of the Publisher is collapse, and it is the correct one.
(D) The poetry editor's decisions on which poems to publish ARE based strictly on judgments of intrinsic merit. => Whether or not the judgement of poetry base on intrinsic merit or not does not affect the validity of reply of the Publisher.
(E) Harry Trevalga submitted his poems to the publisherâ€™s publication WITHOUT his pen name. => same side with the publisher, does not collapse his reply.

yashii9 · Answer

C

1. Editor + Grudge for Harry - >No publication of poetry
2. Editor Does not read names - >  so she cant know who wrote it  -> hence no scope for discrimination (Conclusion)

The red text is the missing link.

Harry Trevalga: You and your publication have unfairly discriminated against my poems. I have submitted thirty poems in the last two years and you have not published any of them! It is all because I won the Fenner Poetry Award two years ago and your poetry editor thought she deserved it.
Publisher: Ridiculous! Our editorial policy and practice is perfectly fair, since our poetry editor judges all submissions for publication without ever seeing the names of the poets, and hence cannot possibly have known who wrote your poems.
The publisher makes which one of the following assumptions in replying to Trevalga charges of unfair discrimination?

(A) The poetry editor does not bear a grudge against Harry Trevalga for his winning the Fenner Poetry Award. Irrelevant 
(B) It is not unusual for poets to contribute many poems to the publisher's publication without ever having any accepted for publication.Irrelevant 
(C) The poetry editor cannot recognize the poems submitted by Harry Trevalga as his unless Trevalga name is attached to them.
(D) The poetry editorâ€™s decisions on which poems to publish are not based strictly on judgments of intrinsic merit. Irrelevant 
(E) Harry Trevalga submitted his poems to the publisherâ€™s publication under his pen name. Irrelevant

sidhu09 · Answer

Only when the editor recognizes the style of a poet reading a poem, will the possiblity of occurance of discrimination be justified.

Option C clearly states that editor cannot recognize the poems unless the poet's name is attached.

Marcab · Answer

Easy c and I doubt on the credibility of the source, stating it as an LSAT question.

Skywalker18 · Answer

Harry Trevalga:  You and your publication have unfairly discriminated against my poems. I have submitted thirty poems in the last two years and you have not published any of them! It is all because I won the Fenner Poetry Award two years ago and your poetry editor thought she deserved it.

Publisher:  Ridiculous! Our editorial policy and practice is perfectly fair, since our poetry editor judges all submissions for publication without ever seeing the names of the poets, and hence cannot possibly have known who wrote your poems.

The publisher makes which one of the following assumptions in replying to Trevalga's charges of unfair discrimination?

Pre-thinking - The issue is here is that, just because the editor cannot see names, why does it follow that the editor does not know Trevalga's work? Perhaps Trevalga uses a very particular writing style about particular subjects and the editor does not publish anything that looks like it could be his work. Either way, this is what I am looking for when going to the answers.

(A) The poetry editor does not bear a grudge against Harry Trevalga for his winning the Fenner Poetry Award. - This helps the publisher's argument but it really isn't necessary. Even if the publisher does bear a grudge, this wouldn't matter in theory because the editor supposedly doesn't know if it is the work of Trevalga.

(B) It is not unusual for poets to contribute many poems to the publisher's publication without ever having any accepted for publication. - does actually sound like the Publisher's point of view, because she might reassure Trevalga that, "Hey, nothing foul is going on. It's totally normal for poets to submit a ton of poems without getting any accepted".

(C) The poetry editor cannot recognize the poems submitted by Harry Trevalga as his unless Trevalga's name is attached to them. - Correct

(D) The poetry editor's decisions on which poems to publish are not based strictly on judgments of intrinsic merit. -- Weakens editors argument

(E) Harry Trevalga submitted his poems to the publisher's publication under his pen name. --this might help the publisher's argument yet it is not necessary.

Answer C

AkshdeepS · Answer

The publisher makes which one of the following assumptions in replying to Trevalga's charges of unfair discrimination?

(A) The  poetry editor  does not bear a  grudge  against  Harry Trevalga  for his winning the Fenner Poetry Award.   Irrelevant as PEs do not see the name of the poets while judging .
 
(B) It is not unusual for poets to  contribute many poems  to the publisher's publication without ever having any accepted for publication.   Out of scope

(C) The  poetry editor cannot recognize  the poems submitted by  Harry Trevalga  as his unless Trevalga's name is attached to them.  Correct

(D) The poetry editor's  decisions  on which poems to publish are  not based strictly on judgments  of intrinsic merit.   Goes against the premise.

(E) Harry Trevalga  submitted  his poems to the publisher's publication  under his pen name .   Pen name is may or may not be same as real name.

(C)

adkikani · Answer

nightblade354   gmatexam439   ammuseeru   pikolo2510   GMATNinja   generis

Can you please explain me negation technique on (C) with specific emphasis on
'unless' . Is this a kind of necessary vs suff condition?

Conclusion: Claim of HT that publishers are discriminated against poems is incorrect

Premise: poetry editor judges all submissions for publication  without ever seeing  the names of the poets,
s o the editor cannot know who wrote the poem . Hence how can you say the publishers are discriminated against
your poems?

VerbalBot · Answer

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Harry Trevalga: You and your publication have unfairly discriminated

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Harry Trevalga: You and your publication have unfairly discriminated

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards