It s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic

Question

It’s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic or drug intoxication is more likely to cause a fire than a sober person. It also seems true that an inebriated person is less capable of extinguishing fires than a sober one. Nevertheless, last year’s statistics from the Cartesian Fire Department show that more fires were caused by sober persons than by those who were inebriated.

Which of the following, if true, best explains the discrepancy above?

(A)The number of Cartesians who neither drink nor use drugs is significantly greater than the number of those who do.

(B)Many fires occur because of malfunctioning electrical and gas equipment, and most people cannot prevent those fires regardless of whether they are drunk or sober.

(C)Cartesian legislation permits drug and alcohol consumption to all Cartesians who are of full legal age.

(D)Many persons who neither drink nor use drugs, smoke cigarettes.

(E)Sometimes, it is hard to establish whether a fire was caused by someone who was sober or drunk.

neha24 · Answer

A seems best : The number of Cartesians who neither drink nor use drugs is significantly greater than the number of those who do.

dave785 · Answer

yeah, it's A.

It's trying to trick you up on percentages vs population sizes.

If getting drunk made you 100% more likely to start a fire then drunk people, PER PERSON, will start more fires than sober people.

This means that one drunk person starts as many fires on average as two sober people.

However, if there are 1000 sober people and only one drunk person, then we would see a lot more fires from sober people... simply because there are a lot more sober people.

neha24 · Answer

what is the source of this question ?

pqhai · Answer

Good question.

A is the best. 
Fact 1: an intoxicated person is more likely to cause a fire than a sober person.
Fact 2: more fires were caused by sober persons than by those who were inebriated
Reason:  what if the number of intoxicated person is very small  ==> the number of fire accidents caused by them is not as great as that caused by sober persons.

A is correct.

PS: I think guerrero25 deserves  kudos  for a lot of good questions.

mun23 · Answer

what`s the problem with B.Need explanation why b is wrong

neha24 · Answer

the argument is not abt preventing fire its abt causing fire

dave785 · Answer

We're trying to explain the seeming discrepancy between two premises, A and B.

Answer B provides a third premise for the cause of fires that might decrease both A and B but has nothing to do with the discrepancy between the two.

VeritasPrepRon · Answer

Definitely A, this is a classic GMAT statistical error.

Whenever you see a question that quotes statistics, you should automatically distrust the statistics. 99.44% of the time, the flaw is right there, and it's generally around one of three subjects: % vs #, generalization or causality. In this case, the poblem revolves around the number of fires started, which obviously will be skewed towards the bigger part of the population. If half the Cartesians were constantly drunk (let's call them quadrants 2 and 4) and half the Cartesians were always sobert (quadrants 1 and 3) then it would be a discrepency that more fires are caused by sober people. However, if the vast majority of people were sober, then even if inebriated people were twice as likely to start a fire, the overall numbers would still favor sober fire starters.

B plays upon causality but offers nothing to reconcile the issue of why more were started by sober people. 
E introduces an element of doubt that does nothing to reconcile the paradox at hand.
C and D are pretty clearly out of scope. They are true but irrelevant to the question.

Hope this helps!
-Ron

ts30 · Answer

Why not E? If it is hard to establish whether a person was drunk or sober when he caused a fire would imply that the dept.'s stats may be skewed . That would explain the discrepancy just as well...

Please clarify.

KarishmaB · Answer

The issue is "Sometimes". Even if it is difficult to establish in "some" cases, it doesn't mean that the statistics have no value. Plus, you don't want to establish that the statistics are wrong. In a paradox question, you want to find the explanation which shows how both sides can co-exist. So focus on how it is possible to explain the statistics.

mohsint25 · Answer

why not D...

I think cigarettes may cause fire...Hence its another reason for sober people to cause fire

KarishmaB · Answer

The reason a sober person causes fire is immaterial. The issue at hand is intoxicated vs sober person.

We need both things to hold true:
- A person in a state of alcoholic or drug intoxication is more likely to cause a fire
- Stats show that more fires were caused by sober persons than by those who were inebriated

and still explain the circumstances.

With (D), you are trying to negate "A person in a state of alcoholic or drug intoxication is more likely to cause a fire" which is not what you need to do here.

abhishekdadarwal2009 · Answer

It’s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic or drug intoxication is more likely to cause a fire than a sober person. It also seems true that an inebriated person is less capable of extinguishing fires than a sober one. Nevertheless, last year’s statistics from the Cartesian Fire Department show that more fires were caused by sober persons than by those who were inebriated.

Which of the following, if true, best explains the discrepancy above?

(A)The number of Cartesians who neither drink nor use drugs is significantly greater than the number of those who do. Correct choice because if the number of people who don't do drugs and so is significantly higher than those who do then the research/fact will not be able to stand.

(B)Many fires occur because of malfunctioning electrical and gas equipment, and most people cannot prevent those fires regardless of whether they are drunk or sober.  fires caused by malfunction of electrical/gas equipments don't fall in the above stated category and is thus out of scope.

(C)Cartesian legislation permits drug and alcohol consumption to all Cartesians who are of full legal age. this one gives more info that all are allowed to drink and so on but it does not explain the discrepancy.

(D)Many persons who neither drink nor use drugs, smoke cigarettes. cigarettes are out of scope.

(E)Sometimes, it is hard to establish whether a fire was caused by someone who was sober or drunk.  cannot explain the discrepancy.

Rashed12 · Answer

karishma

Let, there are total 100 people.
40 people take alcohol and drug, out of 40 people, 30 people are responsible to cause fire.
out of 60 sober people, only 20 people are responsible to cause fire.

Hence, the number of sober people is greater than the number of people who take alcohol and drink.

So how A is correct?

Posted from my mobile device

chetan2u · Answer

A person who is drunk more likely to cause a fire. However, statistics at some place C show that there were more fires by non drunks. 
What can be the cause.

Our answer will have to plug the gap and will have to do with the drunks and non drunks. 
If the number of non drunks is way higher than the number of the drunks, say there are 50 non drunks to every 5 drunks. 
These 50 non drunks result in 5 fires while 5 drunks are responsible for 3 fires. So the likelihood of fire started by non drunks is 5/50 or 1/10 and by drunks is 3/5 or 6/10.

A

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

It s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic

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

It s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic

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