GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 22 Sep 2018, 20:01

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

It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual

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

Hide Tags

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 05 Dec 2014
Posts: 217
Location: India
GMAT 1: 690 Q48 V36
GPA: 3.54
CAT Tests
Re: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Nov 2017, 23:58
1
hi, I understood that why B is correct, but i fail to understand that how option E supports the argument. Kindly help.
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
P
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2021
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Nov 2017, 14:55
3
sunny91 wrote:
hi, I understood that why B is correct, but i fail to understand that how option E supports the argument. Kindly help.

We are trying to determine whether participating in social interaction (i.e. talking to other people) engages many mental and perceptual skills and thus helps people maintain mental sharpness as they age, just as solving crossword puzzles or mathematics problems does. The evidence in support of this theory is that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills.

Quote:
(E) The tasks evaluating mental sharpness for which data were compiled by the study were more akin to mathematics problems than to conversation.

According to the study, if you had more social contact, then you generally had better mental skills. But how were those mental skills measured? What if the tasks used to evaluate mental sharpness were more akin to CONVERSATION than to math problems? All that would show is that people with more social contact are better at conversation (duh!). That doesn't really support the idea that social contact can REPLACE math problems and crossword puzzles as a way to maintain mental sharpness.

However, what if the tasks used to evaluate mental sharpness were more akin to MATHEMATICS problems than to conversation? That would suggest that social contact COULD replace math problems as a way to stay sharp. In other words, you don't NEED math problems to stay sharp with mathematical tasks. Rather, you could use social contact to stay sharp with mathematical tasks. That could strengthen the argument.

I hope that helps!
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars
Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply?
Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99 | Time management on verbal

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 17 Sep 2016
Posts: 276
Re: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Mar 2018, 01:39
Quote:
It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual activities such as solving crossword puzzles or mathematics problems in order to maintain mental sharpness as they age. In fact, however, simply talking to other people---that is, participating in social interaction, which engages many mental and perceptual skills---suffices.Evidence to this effect comes from a study showing that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?

(A) As people grow older, they are often advised to keep exercising their physical and mental capacities in order to maintain or improve them.

(B) Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation.

(C) Many people are proficient both in social interactions and in solving mathematical problems.

(D) The study did not itself collect data but analyzed data bearing on the issue from prior studies.

(E) The tasks evaluating mental sharpness for which data were compiled by the study were more akin to mathematics problems than to conversation.


Hi mikemcgarry, GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja, MagooshExpert Carolyn, sayantanc2k,
This is a question that i stratch my head, genuinely need your help

#1 conclusion
IMO, the conclusion is " simply talking to other people suffices "
rather than "Evidence to this effect comes from a study showing that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills."
Right?

#2
I don't compleltely understand the question "Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?"

Should i weaken the evidence or conclusion ?
Does "the force of the evidence cited" mean conclusion? i know premise/evidence supports conclusion, but i am not sure whether the force of the evidence cited means conclusion.

there are two evidence in the prompt, If the stem ask to weaken evidence, then i just need weaken one of the premises, no matter which one,
in other words, i need to weaken either premise 1 (engage intellectual activities can mantain mental sharpness) or premise 2 (more social activities, higher mental skills), right?

#3 causal relationship
Seems there are lots of people view this question as a causal relationship.
the last sentence "Evidence to this effect comes from a study showing that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills."
Does it imply causal relationship? but it just imply the coreleration between more social activities and higher skills?

#4 answer choice B Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation
what does B indicate? a third event causes two events, or a certain event cause a event mentioned in premise.
a third event causes two events -- a mendical condition and treatments cause both poor mental sharpness and social isolation.
or
a certain event cause a event mentioned in premise -- a certain medical condition and treatment that affact mential sharpness causes social isolation.

thanks in advance
have a nice day
>_~
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
S
Joined: 30 Oct 2017
Posts: 172
Re: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 18 Mar 2018, 16:22
zoezhuyan wrote:
Hi mikemcgarry, GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja, MagooshExpert Carolyn, sayantanc2k,
This is a question that i stratch my head, genuinely need your help

#1 conclusion
IMO, the conclusion is " simply talking to other people suffices "
rather than "Evidence to this effect comes from a study showing that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills."
Right?

#2
I don't compleltely understand the question "Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?"

Should i weaken the evidence or conclusion ?
Does "the force of the evidence cited" mean conclusion? i know premise/evidence supports conclusion, but i am not sure whether the force of the evidence cited means conclusion.

there are two evidence in the prompt, If the stem ask to weaken evidence, then i just need weaken one of the premises, no matter which one,
in other words, i need to weaken either premise 1 (engage intellectual activities can mantain mental sharpness) or premise 2 (more social activities, higher mental skills), right?

#3 causal relationship
Seems there are lots of people view this question as a causal relationship.
the last sentence "Evidence to this effect comes from a study showing that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills."
Does it imply causal relationship? but it just imply the coreleration between more social activities and higher skills?

#4 answer choice B Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation
what does B indicate? a third event causes two events, or a certain event cause a event mentioned in premise.
a third event causes two events -- a mendical condition and treatments cause both poor mental sharpness and social isolation.
or
a certain event cause a event mentioned in premise -- a certain medical condition and treatment that affact mential sharpness causes social isolation.

thanks in advance
have a nice day
>_~


Hi zoezhuyan!

Happy to help :-)

#1 Yes, that is correct :-) The conclusion here is that "simply talking to other people suffices". The last sentence is evidence which supports that conclusion.

#2 A piece of evidence in an argument is a fact. So it never makes sense to question the evidence directly, since that would be questioning a fact, which is not going to work. Instead, what we want to do, is question the fact's connection to the conclusion. Asking us to weaken the force of the evidence cited is basically a more specific way of asking us to question the conclusion. It's asking us to weaken the evidence's connection or support of the conclusion. So it's basically asking us to weaken the conclusion, but specifically in context of this piece of evidence.

Here, the evidence cited that we are supposed to address is specifically mentioned in the passage: Evidence to this effect comes from a study showing that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills. So this is the piece of evidence, and we want to weaken its connection to the conclusion.

#3 Again, a piece of evidence is just a fact. It's up to the author of the argument to interpret the fact. Here, the evidence is that the more people interact socially, the better their mental skills. That's all -- there is no inherent causation implied just from this fact. So there may just be a correlation between social activity and higher mental skills.

#4 B indicates that there is a third factor, like a medical condition or treatment, that lowers both mental skills and social interaction. This would be a hidden factor that could explain the correlation between social activity and mental skills, which implies that there is no causation between social activity and mental skills.

Hope that helps! :-)
-Carolyn
_________________

Magoosh Test Prep

Image

Image

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 17 Sep 2016
Posts: 276
Re: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Mar 2018, 00:59
MagooshExpert wrote:
#4 B indicates that there is a third factor, like a medical condition or treatment, that lowers both mental skills and social interaction. This would be a hidden factor that could explain the correlation between social activity and mental skills, which implies that there is no causation between social activity and mental skills.

Hope that helps! :-)
-Carolyn

Hi Carolyn, MagooshExpert,
I still did not get why B can weaken.

The logic of the prompt is :
more social activities , higher mental skills. -----> engaging social activities is sufficient.

we need to weaken the connection between "more social activities, higher mental skills" and "engaging social activities is sufficient",
I donnot under why B is correct, although there are lots of discussions, i am afraid i am not convinced.

Why B causes the lower both social activities and mental skills, then B weakens
you said B is a third factor , like a medical condition or treatment, lowers both mental skills and social interaction, how does it implies that there is no causation between activity and mental skills?

B causes the lower both social activities and mental skills, but it is highly possibile that social activities causes mental skills, and a medical condition and treatment shows the tendency of isolation,

moreover, i dhon't understand why there are double negative words, "affact mental sharpness" and "social isolations",
if B is that Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely help a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social interactions, then b strengthens ?

Please help.

Have a nice day
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 13 Jan 2017
Posts: 29
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Mar 2018, 02:04
Zoezhuyan,

the argument says that social interaction suffices to keep mental sharpness. But we need to weaken so we need to show that just (not much) social interaction is not sufficient to keep mental sharpness because evidence shows that only much social interaction is sufficient. Point (B) does it because it says that some medical treatment decrease social activity that is not sufficient for keeping mental sharpness.
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
P
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2021
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Mar 2018, 19:50
1
I know that I'm late to the party and some magnificently smart people have already weighed in... but just in case it helps, here's an extra two cents:
zoezhuyan wrote:
Hi mikemcgarry, GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja, MagooshExpert Carolyn, sayantanc2k,
This is a question that i stratch my head, genuinely need your help

#1 conclusion
IMO, the conclusion is " simply talking to other people suffices "
rather than "Evidence to this effect comes from a study showing that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills."
Right?

You got it!

zoezhuyan wrote:
#2
I don't compleltely understand the question "Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?"

Should i weaken the evidence or conclusion ?
Does "the force of the evidence cited" mean conclusion? i know premise/evidence supports conclusion, but i am not sure whether the force of the evidence cited means conclusion.

there are two evidence in the prompt, If the stem ask to weaken evidence, then i just need weaken one of the premises, no matter which one,
in other words, i need to weaken either premise 1 (engage intellectual activities can mantain mental sharpness) or premise 2 (more social activities, higher mental skills), right?

Yes, we have two "premises", but the passage specifically refers to one piece of "evidence": ""Evidence to this effect comes from a study showing that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills."

We want to specifically weaken the force of that piece of evidence. The author uses that evidence to arrive at the conclusion, so if we weaken the force of that evidence, then we will ultimately weaken the conclusion too.

In other words, the author jumps from that evidence to the conclusion. We want something that gets in the way of that logical jump.

zoezhuyan wrote:
#3 causal relationship
Seems there are lots of people view this question as a causal relationship.
the last sentence "Evidence to this effect comes from a study showing that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills."
Does it imply causal relationship? but it just imply the coreleration between more social activities and higher skills?

Now you are barking up the right tree! The evidence is that people who report more social contact have better mental skills. According to the author, this is evidence that social contact causes better mental skills. Sure, the evidence doesn't prove this, but it at least suggests that such a causal relationship is possible.

But is that necessarily the case? If one of the answer choices suggests otherwise, then we've found our answer.

zoezhuyan wrote:
#4 answer choice B Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation
what does B indicate? a third event causes two events, or a certain event cause a event mentioned in premise.
a third event causes two events -- a mendical condition and treatments cause both poor mental sharpness and social isolation.
or
a certain event cause a event mentioned in premise -- a certain medical condition and treatment that affact mential sharpness causes social isolation.

thanks in advance
have a nice day
>_~

Choice (B) refers to medical conditions and treatments that cause worse mental skills. Many of those conditions/treatments ALSO cause social isolation. So social isolation is not causing worse mental skills. Instead, the conditions/treatments are causing both worse mental skills AND social isolation (or, as you put it, "a third event causes two events").

This explains why we would see a correlation between social contact and mental skills (i.e. explains the evidence). However, it strongly suggests that social contact levels are not actually CAUSING better/worse mental skills. The conditions/treatments are the cause.

So we have not changed the evidence, but we have come up with an alternate explanation that weakens the force of that evidence. Thus, (B) is the right answer.

I hope that helps!
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars
Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply?
Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99 | Time management on verbal

Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
S
Joined: 30 Oct 2017
Posts: 172
Re: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Mar 2018, 21:19
2
zoezhuyan wrote:
Hi Carolyn, MagooshExpert,
I still did not get why B can weaken.

The logic of the prompt is :
more social activities , higher mental skills. -----> engaging social activities is sufficient.

we need to weaken the connection between "more social activities, higher mental skills" and "engaging social activities is sufficient",
I donnot under why B is correct, although there are lots of discussions, i am afraid i am not convinced.

Why B causes the lower both social activities and mental skills, then B weakens
you said B is a third factor , like a medical condition or treatment, lowers both mental skills and social interaction, how does it implies that there is no causation between activity and mental skills?

B causes the lower both social activities and mental skills, but it is highly possibile that social activities causes mental skills, and a medical condition and treatment shows the tendency of isolation,

moreover, i dhon't understand why there are double negative words, "affact mental sharpness" and "social isolations",
if B is that Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely help a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social interactions, then b strengthens ?

Please help.

Have a nice day


Hi zoezhuyan!

Happy to help :-)

Let's think of an easier example. Say we are looking at sales of ice cream and sales of lemonade. If we look at both of them over time, we might see that they are correlated -- when sales of ice cream go up, sales of lemonade also go up, and when sales of ice cream go down, sales of lemonade also go down. From just looking at that data, we might say that therefore sales of ice cream are actually causing the high lemonade sales -- so, maybe when people eat a lot of ice cream, they get thirsty, and then go out and buy lemonade.

However, there's actually a simpler explanation. In the summer, it's hot outside, and so people will be more likely to buy ice cream. They will also be more likely to buy lemonade. So if we consider this third factor, the weather, that explains the correlation between sales of ice cream and lemonade. That disproves the idea that the sales of ice cream are causing the sales of lemonade, because now the correlation between the two is explained by a third factor, the weather.

That's what's going on here -- if there is a third factor that explains the correlation between social interactions and mental sharpness, that weakens the idea that one is caused by the other.

Does that help? If not, let me know! :-)
_________________

Magoosh Test Prep

Image

Image

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 17 Sep 2016
Posts: 276
Re: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Apr 2018, 03:13
Hi mikemcgarry, GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja, MagooshExpert Carolyn, sayantanc2k,
Today, I reviewed this question again. I interpreted as a bit different reasoning, but I am not sure whether it is sound, please help confirm.

Situation:
someone proposes engage in intellectual activities will help maintain mental sharpness,
author argues that social interaction is sufficient, according to a study that shows more social activities, higher mental skills.

Goal
this is a weaken question, so I need to find one that prove the study won't lead to the conclusion that social interaction is sufficient, or direct find one weaken the conclusion by showing that social interaction is insufficient -- maybe intellectual activities is need, rather than mere social activities.

choice B states that some treatments and medial conditions will increase people's social isolation,
then i can infer that people unwilling to engage social activities. in other words, they need intellectual activities to maintain mental sharpness, meanwhile, the study doesnot work on the group who has social isolation. the study does not cover the group, it is not representative.

Choice E
First from the argument, i can infer that intellectual activities such as mathematics problems are higer level than simple social activities,
if E is true -- the tasks were evaluated by more mathematic problem (higher level), addition, the study shows that more social activities, higher mental skills,
then social activities can match the higher level,

then, i view social activities are sufficient,

hei, it stengthen.

Experts, please confirm my reasoning is correct or not.

Have a nice day
>_~
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
S
Joined: 20 Nov 2016
Posts: 278
CAT Tests
Re: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Apr 2018, 07:30
zoezhuyan wrote:
Hi mikemcgarry, GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja, MagooshExpert Carolyn, sayantanc2k,
Today, I reviewed this question again. I interpreted as a bit different reasoning, but I am not sure whether it is sound, please help confirm.

Situation:
someone proposes engage in intellectual activities will help maintain mental sharpness,
author argues that social interaction is sufficient, according to a study that shows more social activities, higher mental skills.

Goal
this is a weaken question, so I need to find one that prove the study won't lead to the conclusion that social interaction is sufficient, or direct find one weaken the conclusion by showing that social interaction is insufficient -- maybe intellectual activities is need, rather than mere social activities.

choice B states that some treatments and medial conditions will increase people's social isolation,
then i can infer that people unwilling to engage social activities. in other words, they need intellectual activities to maintain mental sharpness, meanwhile, the study doesnot work on the group who has social isolation. the study does not cover the group, it is not representative.

Choice E
First from the argument, i can infer that intellectual activities such as mathematics problems are higer level than simple social activities,
if E is true -- the tasks were evaluated by more mathematic problem (higher level), addition, the study shows that more social activities, higher mental skills,
then social activities can match the higher level,

then, i view social activities are sufficient,

hei, it stengthen.

Experts, please confirm my reasoning is correct or not.

Have a nice day
>_~


zoezhuyan wrote:
choice B states that some treatments and medial conditions will increase people's social isolation,
then i can infer that people unwilling to engage social activities. in other words, they need intellectual activities to maintain mental sharpness, meanwhile, the study doesnot work on the group who has social isolation. the study does not cover the group, it is not representative.

zoezhuyan, I wouldn't say that the study does not cover the group. The problem is that the data will be skewed by those people. Researchers will look at those people and say, "well, they are socially isolated and they have lower mental skills, so their social isolation must be causing lower mental skills." Choice (B) tells us that the social isolation does not cause the lower mental skills. Instead, the medical conditions cause both the social isolation and the lower mental skills.

zoezhuyan wrote:
First from the argument, i can infer that intellectual activities such as mathematics problems are higer level than simple social activities,

I'm not sure about this part... the passage doesn't say that mathematics problems are HIGHER level than simple social activities. Rather, the passage says that social interaction "engages many mental and perceptual skills" and suggests that this might have the same effect as engaging in intellectual activities such as solving crossword puzzles or mathematics problems.

This explanation of choice (E) might help.

I'm not sure if that answers your questions, but I hope it helps!
_________________

www.gmatninja.com

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 17 Sep 2016
Posts: 276
Re: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Apr 2018, 00:59
GMATNinjaTwo wrote:
zoezhuyan wrote:
choice B states that some treatments and medial conditions will increase people's social isolation,
then i can infer that people unwilling to engage social activities. in other words, they need intellectual activities to maintain mental sharpness, meanwhile, the study doesnot work on the group who has social isolation. the study does not cover the group, it is not representative.

zoezhuyan, I wouldn't say that the study does not cover the group. The problem is that the data will be skewed by those people. Researchers will look at those people and say, "well, they are socially isolated and they have lower mental skills, so their social isolation must be causing lower mental skills." Choice (B) tells us that the social isolation does not cause the lower mental skills. Instead, the medical conditions cause both the social isolation and the lower mental skills.

zoezhuyan wrote:
First from the argument, i can infer that intellectual activities such as mathematics problems are higer level than simple social activities,

I'm not sure about this part... the passage doesn't say that mathematics problems are HIGHER level than simple social activities. Rather, the passage says that social interaction "engages many mental and perceptual skills" and suggests that this might have the same effect as engaging in intellectual activities such as solving crossword puzzles or mathematics problems.

This explanation of choice (E) might help.

I'm not sure if that answers your questions, but I hope it helps!


Thanks so much, GMATNinjaTwo
I got it.
the correlation between social activities and mental sharpness. but it does not necessary causalation-- social activities cause mental sharpness.
mostly, I cannot congitate the key problem question.
this case, the conclusion is social activities is sufficient, but i did not catch it is causal - effect relationship,
I do NOT know why i missed the key of this question, and how to solve in my future CR questions.

any suggestion?

Thanks in advance,

Have a nice day
>_~
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
S
Joined: 20 Nov 2016
Posts: 278
CAT Tests
Re: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Apr 2018, 08:15
zoezhuyan wrote:
GMATNinjaTwo wrote:
zoezhuyan wrote:
choice B states that some treatments and medial conditions will increase people's social isolation,
then i can infer that people unwilling to engage social activities. in other words, they need intellectual activities to maintain mental sharpness, meanwhile, the study doesnot work on the group who has social isolation. the study does not cover the group, it is not representative.

zoezhuyan, I wouldn't say that the study does not cover the group. The problem is that the data will be skewed by those people. Researchers will look at those people and say, "well, they are socially isolated and they have lower mental skills, so their social isolation must be causing lower mental skills." Choice (B) tells us that the social isolation does not cause the lower mental skills. Instead, the medical conditions cause both the social isolation and the lower mental skills.

zoezhuyan wrote:
First from the argument, i can infer that intellectual activities such as mathematics problems are higer level than simple social activities,

I'm not sure about this part... the passage doesn't say that mathematics problems are HIGHER level than simple social activities. Rather, the passage says that social interaction "engages many mental and perceptual skills" and suggests that this might have the same effect as engaging in intellectual activities such as solving crossword puzzles or mathematics problems.

This explanation of choice (E) might help.

I'm not sure if that answers your questions, but I hope it helps!


Thanks so much, GMATNinjaTwo
I got it.
the correlation between social activities and mental sharpness. but it does not necessary causalation-- social activities cause mental sharpness.
mostly, I cannot congitate the key problem question.
this case, the conclusion is social activities is sufficient, but i did not catch it is causal - effect relationship,
I do NOT know why i missed the key of this question, and how to solve in my future CR questions.

any suggestion?

Thanks in advance,

Have a nice day
>_~

I can't say I have an easy answer, but have you read the Ultimate CR Guide for Beginners?

As for identifying the conclusion, try to ask yourself, "Does everything else in the passage support this statement?" In other words, does everything else "build up" to that statement? Or does that statement actually serve as "build up" to another statement? The goal is to get inside the author's head, so to speak... make sure you understand why he/she wrote the passage (the heart of the passage) and the structure of their argument (i.e. his/her logic). The Ultimate CR Guide expands on these concepts, so hopefully you'll find that article useful!
_________________

www.gmatninja.com

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Status: Applying
Joined: 24 Oct 2017
Posts: 21
Location: India
WE: Investment Banking (Investment Banking)
CAT Tests
Re: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Jul 2018, 05:18
Hey EMPOWERgmatVerbal KarishmaB GMATNinja GMATNinjaTwo MagooshExpert mikemcgarry

Any recommendations for theory/questions which address how to deal with double negatives in CR? I feel more practice can help me in understanding this better. Thank you for you help :)
EMPOWERgmat Instructor
User avatar
B
Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Posts: 316
Re: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 24 Jul 2018, 16:14
SugandhaM wrote:

Any recommendations for theory/questions which address how to deal with double negatives in CR? I feel more practice can help me in understanding this better. Thank you for you help :)


Sure, here's one brand new example from the OG 2019:

https://gmatclub.com/forum/boreal-owls- ... l#p2098211

Boreal owls range over a much larger area than do other owls of similar size. Scientists have hypothesized that it is scarcity of prey that leads the owls to range so widely. This hypothesis would be hard to confirm directly, since it is not possible to produce a sufficiently accurate count of the populations of small mammals inhabiting the forests where boreal owls live. Careful study of owl behavior has, however, shown that boreal owls do range over larger areas when they live in regions where food of the sort eaten by small mammals is comparatively sparse. This indicates that the scientists’ hypothesis is not sheer speculation.

Here we have: "Not sheer speculation"


Processing Double Negatives:
We have two mechanisms to process double negatives.

1) Understanding how to translate to a logical opposite
This gets pretty involved and technical---and is actually a major skill required to beat the LSAT. Accordingly, I'd really only recommend getting into this if you're at V40 and are looking to advance from there.

That said, the basic idea is taking the opposite but you have to understand the nuances. For example, "not bad" can not simply be translated to good. "Not bad" technically means anything other than bad (okay-good).

"Not sheer speculation" means beyond speculation, so that could include reasonable, or even plausible.

2) CONTEXT!
By interpreting a statement in the context of the prompt, we gain a quick and effective understanding of a double-negative. Here in this prompt, we see how the new evidence lends credence to the theory, thus we learn that "not sheer speculation" means that it's not far fetched---it's reasonable, it's worth considering as a serious theory.


Bigger Picture
Ultimately, as with anything on Verbal, you have to READ CAREFULLY. If you're skimming, you're losing points. Read to understand, and things such as double negatives actually vanish as a thing you need to train for specifically.
_________________

"Students study. GMAT assassins train."
Image

Image

★★★★★ GMAT Club Verified Reviews for EMPOWERgmat & Special Discount


GMAT Club Verbal Advantage EMPOWERgmat Critical Reasoning Question Pack

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 28 Jul 2018
Posts: 3
Re: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Aug 2018, 16:50
I am sorry , you have flaw in the reasoning !

( A => B ) is equivalent to ( No B => No A ) and not equivalent as you said , to ( No A => No B)

A= social interaction
B = Mental sharpeness
Director
Director
User avatar
B
Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Posts: 636
Location: India
Re: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Aug 2018, 19:31
WillGetIt wrote:
It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual activities such as solving crossword puzzles or mathematics problems in order to maintain mental sharpness as they age. In fact, however, simply talking to other people—that is, participating in social interaction, which engages many mental and perceptual skills—suffices. Evidence to this effect comes from a study showing that the more social contact people report, the better their mental skills.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the force of the evidence cited?

(A) As people grow older, they are often advised to keep exercising their physical and mental capacities in order to maintain or improve them.

(B) Many medical conditions and treatments that adversely affect a person's mental sharpness also tend to increase that person's social isolation.

(C) Many people are proficient both in social interactions and in solving mathematical problems.

(D) The study did not itself collect data but analyzed data bearing on the issue from prior studies.

(E) The tasks evaluating mental sharpness for which data were compiled by the study were more akin to mathematics problems than to conversation.

Similar Official Question : LINK



Let us say there is a common problem which is self confidence. The argument is, this affects both your mental sharpness and your social abilities. So you cannot use social skills to solve the problem of mental performance.

If you try to improve your confidence may be both the problems of mental performance and social isolation could be addressed. But cant it be solved directly either through puzzle solving or social interactions? Solving puzzles and engaging with people are two different intellectual tools to solve the problem. The author himself says that social interaction is an intellectual task. So saying that anything that reduces sharpness also reduce the ability to interact as choice B does, is superfluous. If you social ability is hampered , so is your puzzle solving skill. So If puzzle solving can help, why not social interactions?
_________________

Srinivasan Vaidyaraman
Sravna Holistic Solutions
http://www.sravnatestprep.com

Holistic and Systematic Approach

GMAT Club Bot
Re: It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual &nbs [#permalink] 25 Aug 2018, 19:31

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 36 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

It is widely assumed that people need to engage in intellectual

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

Events & Promotions

PREV
NEXT


Copyright

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| 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®.