It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 23 Feb 2017, 00:51

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 12 Oct 2009
Posts: 268
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 159 [1] , given: 4

It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Oct 2009, 08:50
1
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

56% (03:13) correct 44% (02:07) wrong based on 41 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from a cause which is known only by one particular effect. This is incorrect because the inferred effect must necessarily be produced by some different characteristic of the cause than is the observed effect, which already serves entirely to describe the cause.

Which one of the following arguments makes the same logical error as the one described by the author in the passage?

(A) An anonymous donor gave a thousand dollars to our historical society. I would guess that that individual also volunteers at the children’s hospital.

(B) The radioactive material caused a genetic mutation, which, in turn, caused the birth defect. Therefore, the radioactive material caused the birth defect.

(C) The tiny, unseen atom is the source of immense power. It must be its highly complex structure that produces this power.

(D) The city orchestra received more funds from the local government this year than ever before. Clearly this administration is more civic-minded than previous ones.

(E) If I heat water, which is a liquid, it evaporates. If I heat hundreds of other liquids like water, they evaporate. Therefore, if I heat any liquid like water, it will evaporate.
If you have any questions
New!
Intern
Joined: 17 Oct 2009
Posts: 8
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Similar Reasoning Tough One [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Oct 2009, 15:34
B IMO
Intern
Joined: 11 Oct 2009
Posts: 27
Schools: HEC,Paris
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Similar Reasoning Tough One [#permalink]

### Show Tags

17 Oct 2009, 23:48
this is a tough one.
i would go with D, because i dont see any particular inferred effect in the rest of the choices. however it is not clear in D as well... but it looks to be the best choice.

please post the OA, with explanation.
Senior Manager
Joined: 12 Oct 2009
Posts: 268
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 159 [0], given: 4

Re: CR - Similar Reasoning Tough One [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Oct 2009, 07:50
OA is E
Intern
Joined: 11 Oct 2009
Posts: 27
Schools: HEC,Paris
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 0

Re: CR - Similar Reasoning Tough One [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Oct 2009, 10:59
IEsailor wrote:
OA is E

could you post the reasoning please?
Manager
Joined: 04 Aug 2009
Posts: 54
Location: pitt
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 2

Re: CR - Similar Reasoning Tough One [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Oct 2009, 16:25
are GMAT 700 question this hard ???
Manager
Joined: 10 Jul 2009
Posts: 129
Location: Ukraine, Kyiv
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 146 [0], given: 60

Re: CR - Similar Reasoning Tough One [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Oct 2009, 23:49
IEsailor, what is the source? and please, post OE.
I found completely different answer (A) here
http://www.urch.com/forums/gmat-critica ... nings.html
_________________

Never, never, never give up

Manager
Joined: 30 Sep 2009
Posts: 58
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 6

Re: CR - Similar Reasoning Tough One [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Oct 2009, 01:14
Yeah I too think the answer should be A.
The argument can be understood to say the following:
1. There is an effect A and an effect B
2. Cause A is known to produce effect A
3. So it is illogical that Cause A can also produce effect B. Only a slightly different characteristic of cause A can produce effect B

Since A is the only option where I found two effects and one cause, I think the answer should be A.
Manager
Joined: 20 May 2009
Posts: 61
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 3

Re: CR - Similar Reasoning Tough One [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Oct 2009, 03:00
IEsailor,pls post the explanation also..........
Manager
Joined: 08 Oct 2009
Posts: 66
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 5

Re: CR - Similar Reasoning Tough One [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Oct 2009, 08:53
Tough question .. we need 1 cause showing 2 effects due to 2 different characteristics. I initially chose C but it has 2 causes (atom being tiny and atom being complex) and 1 effect (immensely powerful).

Closer look at A shows the flawed reasoning .. cause could be the fact that the individual is a good/charitable person; effect 1 is him donating money to historical society and effect 2 is him volunteering at a childrens hospital. They demonstrate different characteristics of his charitable personality - money for the 1st and time for the second.

Thats how i think of the answer anyway. If someone has a better or official explanation, please share!
Manager
Joined: 22 Jun 2009
Posts: 64
Schools: Wharton, Kellogg, Duke (Health care management)
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 3

Re: CR - Similar Reasoning Tough One [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Oct 2009, 15:03
I got E. I looked at the problem like this:
The flawed logic is that there is one cause and it results in only one effect and nothing else. Since the questions says the stimulus is a flawed logic, it is possible that cause produces other effects also.
In E, the liquid is expected to evaporate, but it can go into other states (say solidify). so there is possibility of other effects than what the option states.
A speaks only of one possibility. It doesn't rule out other possibilities (guess is the key) like the stimulus does.
Senior Manager
Affiliations: PMP
Joined: 13 Oct 2009
Posts: 312
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 162 [1] , given: 37

Re: CR - Similar Reasoning Tough One [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Oct 2009, 15:24
1
KUDOS
It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from a cause which is known only by one particular effect. This is incorrect because the inferred effect must necessarily be produced by some different characteristic of the cause than is the observed effect, which already serves entirely to describe the cause.

Which one of the following arguments makes the same logical error as the one described by the author in the passage?

(A) An anonymous donor gave a thousand dollars to our historical society. I would guess that that individual also volunteers at the children’s hospital.
(E) If I heat water, which is a liquid, it evaporates. If I heat hundreds of other liquids like water, they evaporate. Therefore, if I heat any liquid like water, it will evaporate.

re writing the question: 1 cause 1 effect, 2nd effect not possible. this is incorrect, 2nd effect is from diff. characteristic than the effect-1

A) anonymous donor is helps the needful-cause, effect-1 is gave 10K dollars, effect 2-is volunteering at children hospital

E) 2 causes and 1 effect
Ans A.
_________________

Thanks, Sri
-------------------------------
keep uppp...ing the tempo...

Press +1 Kudos, if you think my post gave u a tiny tip

Manager
Joined: 18 Jul 2009
Posts: 169
Location: India
Schools: South Asian B-schools
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 100 [1] , given: 37

Re: CR - Similar Reasoning Tough One [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Oct 2009, 11:47
1
KUDOS
S_O_S
Some one plz help & take it forward ( i have given my understanding but no ans )

basic cause >> characteristic 1 >> ( effect 1: observed )
basic cause >> characteristic 2 >> ( effect 2 : inferred )

It is illogical to infer a second and different effect (effect 2 : inferred) from a cause which is known only by one particular effect (effect 1: observed).[ cause is known by observed effect 1...author claims that it is illogical to infer effect 2...hence effect 2 cannot happen ]
This is incorrect (means negate above underlined statement.....effect 2 can happen) because the inferred effect (effect 2 : inferred) must necessarily be produced by some different characteristic (characteristic 2) of the cause ( basic cause) than is the observed effect ( effect 1: observed ), which already serves entirely to describe the cause ( means...observed effect 1 already serves entirely to describe the basic cause)

So in short

it is not only effect 1 but effect 2 is also possible from cause, because characteristic 2 exists.

(A) An anonymous donor gave a thousand dollars to our historical society. I would guess that that individual also volunteers at the children’s hospital.
observed effect 1 : anonymous donor gave a thousand dollars to our historical society
inferred effect 2 : individual also volunteers at the children’s hospital ( refer I would guess..hence inferred effect)....but no mention of characteristic..

(B) The radioactive material caused a genetic mutation, which, in turn, caused the birth defect. Therefore, the radioactive material caused the birth defect.
observed effect 1 : birth defect because of >> characteristic 1 : The radioactive material leading genetic mutation
inferred effect 2 (refer therefore) : birth defect because of >> characteristic 1 : The radioactive material leading genetic mutation
this is circular reasoning...our reasoning is not circular hence dropped

(C) The tiny, unseen atom is the source of immense power. It must be its highly complex structure that produces this power.
observed effect 1: immense power because of characteristic 1 : tiny atom
inferred effect 2 ( refer...It must be) : complex structure that produces this power

(D) The city orchestra received more funds from the local government this year than ever before. Clearly this administration is more civic-minded than previous ones.
observed effect 1: The city orchestra received more funds
inferred effect 2 (refer ...Clearly) : this administration is more civic-minded

(E) If I heat water, which is a liquid, it evaporates. If I heat hundreds of other liquids like water, they evaporate. Therefore, if I heat any liquid like water, it will evaporate.
observed effect 1 : [heat liquid water > it evaporates] & [heat other 100 liquids like water > they also evaporate]
inferred effect 2 (refer...Therefore): I heat any liquid like water, it will evaporate

AM i right ? heavy weights plz jump in to help....
_________________

Bhushan S.
If you like my post....Consider it for Kudos

VP
Status: There is always something new !!
Affiliations: PMI,QAI Global,eXampleCG
Joined: 08 May 2009
Posts: 1353
Followers: 17

Kudos [?]: 243 [0], given: 10

Re: CR - Similar Reasoning Tough One [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 May 2011, 06:33
clean A.
_________________

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

Verbal Forum Moderator
Status: Getting strong now, I'm so strong now!!!
Affiliations: National Institute of Technology, Durgapur
Joined: 04 Jun 2013
Posts: 638
Location: India
GPA: 3.32
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 98

Kudos [?]: 546 [0], given: 80

Re: It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Nov 2013, 11:16
New Gmat club project

_________________

Regards,

S

Consider +1 KUDOS if you find this post useful

Intern
Joined: 10 Sep 2013
Posts: 41
Location: United States
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
GMAT Date: 12-10-2013
GPA: 3.5
WE: Operations (Manufacturing)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 32 [0], given: 18

Re: It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Nov 2013, 09:21
E , but took me 3 min to get it.

It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from a cause which is known only by one particular effect. This is incorrect because the inferred effect must necessarily be produced by some different characteristic of the cause than is the observed effect, which already serves entirely to describe the cause.
It says ==== C1 --causes--> E1 only and to infer that C1 ----causes--> E2 is illogical
Author says = C1--through characteristic 1--causes--> E1 and C1-- through characteristic 2 causes--> E2.
Now we have to find out which one makes the same error, as C1 can cause only one effect and does not consider the characteristic of c1.[/color]
(A) An anonymous donor gave a thousand dollars to our historical society. I would guess that that individual also volunteers at the children’s hospital. -- two characteristic of same donor.
(B) The radioactive material caused a genetic mutation, which, in turn, caused the birth defect. Therefore, the radioactive material caused the birth defect. - This is irrelevant- it shows circular reasoning
(C) The tiny, unseen atom is the source of immense power. It must be its highly complex structure that produces this power. it tells what is the characteristic of atom behind producing immense power
(D) The city orchestra received more funds from the local government this year than ever before. Clearly this administration is more civic-minded than previous ones. its reason is similar to C, it tells a characteristic of city administration
(E) If I heat water, which is a liquid, it evaporates. If I heat hundreds of other liquids like water, they evaporate. Therefore, if I heat any liquid like water, it will evaporate. - It says heating a liquid causes evaporation. it concludes that if any liquid like water will be heated, it will evaporate. it ignore the characteristic of liquid substance, and assumes no other effect will take place.
Senior Manager
Joined: 03 Dec 2012
Posts: 367
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 124 [0], given: 291

Re: It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Nov 2013, 02:35
we are looking for flawed reasoning over here. E is clearly flawed while there is a chance B might be true.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10624
Followers: 941

Kudos [?]: 207 [0], given: 0

Re: It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Aug 2016, 03:41
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.
Re: It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from   [#permalink] 29 Aug 2016, 03:41
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
2 Is there a difference between inference and must be true 2 24 Oct 2012, 13:17
1 It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from 4 25 Jan 2010, 09:19
6 It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from 12 17 Jun 2009, 22:21
2 It is illogical to infer a second and different effect from 2 29 Jan 2008, 00:24
Which one of the following can be properly inferred from 1 24 May 2007, 09:10
Display posts from previous: Sort by