It is currently 20 Feb 2018, 07:39

Close

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

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

In the course of her researches, a historian recently found

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 03 Mar 2010
Posts: 413
Schools: Simon '16 (M)
Re: Peddler [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Apr 2011, 04:58
what would you say about E?

If S claimed in an undated document that he had been peddling for 20 years, would you believe him more without an arrest record than with a record arrest?
_________________

My dad once said to me: Son, nothing succeeds like success.

1 KUDOS received
Director
Director
avatar
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 863
Reviews Badge
Re: Peddler [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Apr 2011, 06:24
1
This post received
KUDOS
(E) The arrest record provides better evidence that Schnitzler peddled than does the undated document.

E is a comparison trap. You can NEVER attack the premise NOR compare the validity of the premise. Unless the evidence states it clearly that one premise is better than the other (which it will not).

Both the documents have to be given equal weightage unless it is stated that one is superior than the other.

jamifahad wrote:
what would you say about E?

If S claimed in an undated document that he had been peddling for 20 years, would you believe him more without an arrest record than with a record arrest?
VP
VP
avatar
Status: There is always something new !!
Affiliations: PMI,QAI Global,eXampleCG
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1260
Re: Peddler [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Apr 2011, 10:30
Clear C.
E is making a judgement statement which doesn't have a sound base from the argument.
_________________

Visit -- http://www.sustainable-sphere.com/
Promote Green Business,Sustainable Living and Green Earth !!

1 KUDOS received
BSchool Forum Moderator
avatar
Joined: 23 Jul 2010
Posts: 557
GPA: 3.4
WE: General Management (Non-Profit and Government)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: In the course of her researches, a historian recently found [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Nov 2013, 05:02
1
This post received
KUDOS
New Gmat club project
Click here

Theory Articles of Main point/Conclusion questions

Thursdays with Ron



Kaplan
http://gmat.kaptest.com/2011/09/07/how- ... gFHrI.dpbs

_________________

How to select your BSchool?
General Mistakes to Avoid on the GMAT
TOP 10 articles on Time Management on the GMAT
Thanks = Kudos. Kudos are appreciated

Rules for posting on the verbal forum

Non-Human User
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10323
Premium Member
Re: In the course of her researches, a historian recently found [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Aug 2015, 23:00
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.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 26 Jul 2015
Posts: 20
GMAT ToolKit User
In the course of her researches, a historian recently found [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 Aug 2015, 07:28
An arrest record doesn't necessarily mean that Schnitzler was found guilty of peddling in 1739, or that he was, in fact, peddling when arrested. It, at most, tells us that the arresting officer had reason to believe that Schnitzler was peddling and therefore arrested him. So, is an arrest record really better evidence than someone's claimed admission of guilt? How do we know the undated statement was actually written by Schnitzler?

Coming to the undated document written before 1765, we need only prove that it could have been written after 1765. Who is to say that Schnitzler was wrongfully arrested in 1739 for peddling and that, perhaps years down the line, actually started peddling. What facts are provided in the statement to eliminate the possibility that Schnitzler perhaps started peddling in 1750 and the undated statement refers to that?
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 02 Sep 2015
Posts: 12
Schools: Fuqua
Re: In the course of her researches, a historian recently found [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Sep 2015, 23:41
gsr wrote:
gsr wrote:
E for me
quote]

I am being totally careless today! C sounds perfectly logical.

He was peddling for 20 years. Definitely he was doing it in 1739. So the range is 1719 - 1759, which is before 1765!
He can't claim in 1765 that he was pedd. for 20 years (starting 1745), because he was arrested in 1739 doing that!
:evil:


This is exactly what I was thinking initially however once you think about the undated document it only refers to the fact that he admits he had been peddling on and off for 20 years. Even though the max limit on his peddling would be up to 1750, the statement could have been said at any possible time in the future (Say he was speaking to someone on record maybe a lawyer in 1766, and he mentioned that he had a point in his life where he peddled for 20 years)
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Posts: 191
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 600 Q48 V27
GMAT 2: 720 Q50 V37
GPA: 3.2
Reviews Badge
Re: In the course of her researches, a historian recently found [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Oct 2015, 07:58
I don't get this. Could not the undated document have been written in 1790 for all we know? What provides evidence that it was not written after 1765?
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 11 Nov 2014
Posts: 3
Location: Viet Nam
Concentration: Statistics, Technology
GMAT 1: 640 Q49 V28
GPA: 3.15
WE: Analyst (Consulting)
In the course of her researches, a historian recently found [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Oct 2015, 21:09
C it is. Here's how it comes:

(1) 1739: arrested of peddling. ~> must start peddling before 1739 (ped<1739)
(2) undated: been peddling for 20 years
(1) and (2) -> undated must be found before 1759 (not sure exact date)
*Notice: (2) may be found even before (1)

Now look at answers:
A. [Stay] May be right, but not sure. We leave it here
B. [Wrong] Repeatedly arrested for peddling? No, (2) -> he peddled and quited peddling then peddled again. No mention about other arrests.
C. [Stay] This must be true as we argued above
D. [Wrong] no info about which before/after which
E. [Wrong] better evidence about peddle? No info about which one is better

So it leaves us A and C. Of course C is better as is it a MUST, while A is a MIGHT

Hope that helps
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 08 Nov 2015
Posts: 35
Schools: Pepperdine '19
Reviews Badge
Re: In the course of her researches, a historian recently found [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Feb 2016, 09:31
CLEARLY, its C.
When you think about it, you'll realize that since he was arrested in 1739, the range of period in which he could've peddled is 1719 to 1759.

Hence, C.
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 18 Jan 2018
Posts: 44
Re: In the course of her researches, a historian recently found [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Jan 2018, 06:19
keyV wrote:
In the course of her researches, a historian recently found two documents mentioning the same person, Erich Schnitzler. One, dated May 3, 1739, is a record of Schnitzler’s arrest for peddling without a license. The second, undated, is a statement by Schnitzler asserting that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years.

The facts above best support which of the following conclusions?

(A) Schnitzler started peddling around 1719. Cannot be concluded. Probably, he had started in 1739 and done it until 1759.
(B) Schnitzler was arrested repeatedly for peddling. Cannot be concluded too. He probably would have got arrested only once.
(C) The undated document was written before 1765. Even if he started peddling in 1739, we can safely conclude he did so until 1759 i.e before 1765.
Hence right choice

(D) The arrest record was written after the undated document. May or may not be correct. Hence wrong choice.
(E) The arrest record provides better evidence that Schnitzler peddled than does the undated document. Cannot judge on how better evidence one document provides than the other. Hence wrong choice.


Choice C appears to be the only possible conclusion of the above.
VP
VP
User avatar
P
Status: Learning
Joined: 20 Dec 2015
Posts: 1132
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
GMAT 1: 670 Q48 V36
GRE 1: 314 Q157 V157
GPA: 3.4
WE: Manufacturing and Production (Manufacturing)
CAT Tests
Re: In the course of her researches, a historian recently found [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 28 Jan 2018, 07:49
keyV wrote:
In the course of her researches, a historian recently found two documents mentioning the same person, Erich Schnitzler. One, dated May 3, 1739, is a record of Schnitzler’s arrest for peddling without a license. The second, undated, is a statement by Schnitzler asserting that he has been peddling off and on for 20 years.

The facts above best support which of the following conclusions?

(A) Schnitzler started peddling around 1719.
(B) Schnitzler was arrested repeatedly for peddling.
(C) The undated document was written before 1765.
(D) The arrest record was written after the undated document.
(E) The arrest record provides better evidence that Schnitzler peddled than does the undated document.


The answer is C

A there is nothing in the argument that suggests A
B This statement also can not be inferred from the argument he might have of might not have been arrested repeatedly.
C If he was arrested then in the undated account he said that he had been peddling on and off for 20 years then we can infer that he continued peddling even after he was arrested and therefore the undated was written before 1765 as 20 years form 1939 is 1959 .
D Again we can not infer about this
E This choice is out of scope we are not bothered even 1 percent about the kind of evidence these two accounts provide are interested in the true statement .While this may be true or may be not .Argument does not provide info about this
_________________

We are more often frightened than hurt; and we suffer more from imagination than from reality

Re: In the course of her researches, a historian recently found   [#permalink] 28 Jan 2018, 07:49

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   [ 52 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

In the course of her researches, a historian recently found

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.