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 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
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.
04 Feb 2025, 01:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
E
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
35%
(medium)
Question Stats:
69% (01:45) correct
31%
(01:53)
wrong
based on 277
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
In terms of population, Mexico City is much larger than Bogota. Since New York has a greater population than Toronto, it follows that Mexico City has more inhabitants than does Toronto.
Any of the following makes the argument more logically correct EXCEPT:
A Bogota has the same population as New York City does.
B Toronto has fewer inhabitants than Bogota.
C Bogota has the same number of inhabitants as Toronto does.
D Mexico City has the same number of inhabitants as New York City does.
E New York City has more inhabitants than Bogota does.
Any of the following makes the argument more logically correct EXCEPT:
A Bogota has the same population as New York City does.
B Toronto has fewer inhabitants than Bogota.
C Bogota has the same number of inhabitants as Toronto does.
D Mexico City has the same number of inhabitants as New York City does.
E New York City has more inhabitants than Bogota does.
04 Feb 2025, 09:08
Kudos
Bookmarks
Let's break down the argument first:
Premise 1: Mexico City is much larger than Bogota.
Premise 2: New York has a greater population than Toronto.
Conclusion: Therefore, Mexico City has more inhabitants than Toronto.
To make this argument more logically sound, we need a link between the populations of Bogota and Toronto (or between New York and Mexico City) that bridges the gap between the two premises.
Now, consider each option:
Option A: "Bogota has the same population as New York City does."
If Bogota and New York have the same population, then since Mexico City > Bogota, it follows that Mexico City > New York. And because New York > Toronto, then Mexico City > Toronto. This supports the argument.
Option B: "Toronto has fewer inhabitants than Bogota."
If Bogota > Toronto and we already have Mexico City > Bogota, then by transitivity, Mexico City > Toronto. This supports the argument.
Option C: "Bogota has the same number of inhabitants as Toronto."
If Bogota = Toronto, then since Mexico City > Bogota, it must be that Mexico City > Toronto. This supports the argument.
Option D: "Mexico City has the same number of inhabitants as New York City does."
If Mexico City = New York and New York > Toronto, then Mexico City > Toronto. This supports the argument.
Option E: "New York City has more inhabitants than Bogota does."
While this might be true, it does not establish any relationship between Bogota and Toronto. It tells us about New York relative to Bogota but doesn't connect Toronto to either Bogota or New York in a way that helps deduce Mexico City's relationship with Toronto. In other words, knowing New York > Bogota does not allow us to infer anything about how Toronto compares to Bogota or Mexico City. Therefore, this option does not make the argument more logically correct.
Answer: E
Premise 1: Mexico City is much larger than Bogota.
Premise 2: New York has a greater population than Toronto.
Conclusion: Therefore, Mexico City has more inhabitants than Toronto.
To make this argument more logically sound, we need a link between the populations of Bogota and Toronto (or between New York and Mexico City) that bridges the gap between the two premises.
Now, consider each option:
Option A: "Bogota has the same population as New York City does."
If Bogota and New York have the same population, then since Mexico City > Bogota, it follows that Mexico City > New York. And because New York > Toronto, then Mexico City > Toronto. This supports the argument.
Option B: "Toronto has fewer inhabitants than Bogota."
If Bogota > Toronto and we already have Mexico City > Bogota, then by transitivity, Mexico City > Toronto. This supports the argument.
Option C: "Bogota has the same number of inhabitants as Toronto."
If Bogota = Toronto, then since Mexico City > Bogota, it must be that Mexico City > Toronto. This supports the argument.
Option D: "Mexico City has the same number of inhabitants as New York City does."
If Mexico City = New York and New York > Toronto, then Mexico City > Toronto. This supports the argument.
Option E: "New York City has more inhabitants than Bogota does."
While this might be true, it does not establish any relationship between Bogota and Toronto. It tells us about New York relative to Bogota but doesn't connect Toronto to either Bogota or New York in a way that helps deduce Mexico City's relationship with Toronto. In other words, knowing New York > Bogota does not allow us to infer anything about how Toronto compares to Bogota or Mexico City. Therefore, this option does not make the argument more logically correct.
Answer: E
04 Feb 2025, 12:57
Kudos
Bookmarks
Premise: M>B and N>T
Conclusion: M>T
So, the one of the assumption can be B>=N and the chain becomes M>B>=N>T
Now, let's evaluate the answer choices
A Bogota has the same population as New York City does. B= N, works, aligned with our assumption
B Toronto has fewer inhabitants than Bogota. B>T, works
C Bogota has the same number of inhabitants as Toronto does. Ok, this is not what we assumed but let's think M>B and if B=T, M>T, which is my conclusion. This works too
D Mexico City has the same number of inhabitants as New York City does. Ok, this is not what we assumed but let's think. M=N. This works too. N>T, M=N, so M>T
E New York City has more inhabitants than Bogota does. N>B and M>B we don't know if m>N or M<N. We cannot establish M>T
Conclusion: M>T
So, the one of the assumption can be B>=N and the chain becomes M>B>=N>T
Now, let's evaluate the answer choices
A Bogota has the same population as New York City does. B= N, works, aligned with our assumption
B Toronto has fewer inhabitants than Bogota. B>T, works
C Bogota has the same number of inhabitants as Toronto does. Ok, this is not what we assumed but let's think M>B and if B=T, M>T, which is my conclusion. This works too
D Mexico City has the same number of inhabitants as New York City does. Ok, this is not what we assumed but let's think. M=N. This works too. N>T, M=N, so M>T
E New York City has more inhabitants than Bogota does. N>B and M>B we don't know if m>N or M<N. We cannot establish M>T
Bunuel
