Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 04:18 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 04:18
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
User avatar
guerrero25
User avatar
Joined: 10 Apr 2012
Last visit: 13 Nov 2019
Posts: 244
Own Kudos:
5,061
 [5]
Given Kudos: 325
Location: United States
Concentration: Technology, Other
GPA: 2.44
WE:Project Management (Telecommunications)
Posts: 244
Kudos: 5,061
 [5]
It s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic Updated on: 17 Apr 2013, 23:44
Originally posted by guerrero25 on 17 Apr 2013, 23:01.
Last edited by guerrero25 on 17 Apr 2013, 23:44, edited 1 time in total.
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
3
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
00:00
Start Timer
Pause Timer
Resume Timer
Show Answer
Hide
Show
History
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!

Difficulty:

45% (medium)

Question Stats:

61% (01:34) correct 39% (01:42) wrong based on 560 sessions

History

Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
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.
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
A
avatar
neha24
avatar
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Last visit: 01 Dec 2014
Posts: 84
Own Kudos:
86
 [2]
Given Kudos: 3
Posts: 84
Kudos: 86
 [2]
It s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic 17 Apr 2013, 23:26
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A seems best :The number of Cartesians who neither drink nor use drugs is significantly greater than the number of those who do.
avatar
dave785
avatar
Joined: 09 Apr 2013
Last visit: 27 Feb 2020
Posts: 161
Own Kudos:
123
 [1]
Given Kudos: 40
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Schools: Wharton '16 (D) Duke '16 (S) Booth '16 (D) Anderson '16
GMAT 1: 710 Q44 V44
GMAT 2: 740 Q48 V44
GPA: 3.1
WE:Sales (Mutual Funds and Brokerage)
Schools: Wharton '16 (D) Duke '16 (S) Booth '16 (D) Anderson '16
GMAT 2: 740 Q48 V44
Posts: 161
Kudos: 123
 [1]
It s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic 17 Apr 2013, 23:35
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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.
avatar
neha24
avatar
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Last visit: 01 Dec 2014
Posts: 84
Own Kudos:
86
Given Kudos: 3
Posts: 84
Kudos: 86
It s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic 17 Apr 2013, 23:48
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
what is the source of this question ?
User avatar
pqhai
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Last visit: 26 Nov 2015
Posts: 867
Own Kudos:
8,883
 [1]
Given Kudos: 123
Location: United States
Posts: 867
Kudos: 8,883
 [1]
It s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic 18 Apr 2013, 11:37
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
guerrero25
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.
Show more

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.
User avatar
mun23
User avatar
Joined: 06 Dec 2012
Last visit: 26 Apr 2013
Posts: 97
Own Kudos:
1,776
Given Kudos: 46
Status:struggling with GMAT
Location: Bangladesh
Concentration: Accounting
GMAT Date: 04-06-2013
GPA: 3.65
Posts: 97
Kudos: 1,776
It s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic 18 Apr 2013, 12:24
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
guerrero25
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.
Show more


what`s the problem with B.Need explanation why b is wrong
avatar
neha24
avatar
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Last visit: 01 Dec 2014
Posts: 84
Own Kudos:
86
Given Kudos: 3
Posts: 84
Kudos: 86
It s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic 18 Apr 2013, 12:25
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
what`s the problem with B.Need explanation why b is wrong
Show more

the argument is not abt preventing fire its abt causing fire
avatar
dave785
avatar
Joined: 09 Apr 2013
Last visit: 27 Feb 2020
Posts: 161
Own Kudos:
123
Given Kudos: 40
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Schools: Wharton '16 (D) Duke '16 (S) Booth '16 (D) Anderson '16
GMAT 1: 710 Q44 V44
GMAT 2: 740 Q48 V44
GPA: 3.1
WE:Sales (Mutual Funds and Brokerage)
Schools: Wharton '16 (D) Duke '16 (S) Booth '16 (D) Anderson '16
GMAT 2: 740 Q48 V44
Posts: 161
Kudos: 123
It s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic 18 Apr 2013, 12:52
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
mun23
guerrero25
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.


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

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.
User avatar
VeritasPrepRon
User avatar
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 11 Dec 2012
Last visit: 16 Nov 2025
Posts: 306
Own Kudos:
695
 [2]
Given Kudos: 66
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 306
Kudos: 695
 [2]
It s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic 18 Apr 2013, 13:05
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
guerrero25
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.
Show more

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
avatar
ts30
avatar
Joined: 09 Mar 2016
Last visit: 10 Oct 2017
Posts: 14
Own Kudos:
2
Given Kudos: 10
Schools: IIMB EPGP"18 (A$)
WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)
Schools: IIMB EPGP"18 (A$)
Posts: 14
Kudos: 2
It s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic 04 Apr 2016, 11:52
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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.
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,989
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,989
It s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic 05 Apr 2016, 00:53
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
ts30
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.
Show more

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.
avatar
mohsint25
avatar
Joined: 08 Dec 2014
Last visit: 12 Mar 2025
Posts: 17
Given Kudos: 3
Location: United States
Schools: Kelley '20 (A)
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
GRE 1: Q165 V165
GPA: 3.1
Schools: Kelley '20 (A)
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V34
GRE 1: Q165 V165
Posts: 17
Kudos: 0
It s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic 05 Apr 2016, 14:34
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
VeritasPrepKarishma
ts30
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.

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.
Show more


why not D...

I think cigarettes may cause fire...Hence its another reason for sober people to cause fire
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,989
 [1]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,989
 [1]
It s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic 05 Apr 2016, 23:02
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
mohsint25
VeritasPrepKarishma
ts30
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.

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.


why not D...

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

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.
User avatar
abhishekdadarwal2009
User avatar
Joined: 04 Sep 2015
Last visit: 07 Dec 2022
Posts: 530
Own Kudos:
476
Given Kudos: 123
Location: India
WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)
Products:
My Reviews
Posts: 530
Kudos: 476
It s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic 09 Mar 2019, 22:56
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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.
User avatar
Rashed12
User avatar
Joined: 26 Nov 2018
Last visit: 23 May 2022
Posts: 189
Own Kudos:
371
Given Kudos: 123
GPA: 3.3
Products:
My Reviews
Posts: 189
Kudos: 371
It s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic 10 Mar 2019, 05:23
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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
User avatar
chetan2u
User avatar
GMAT Expert
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Last visit: 15 Nov 2025
Posts: 11,238
Own Kudos:
43,702
Given Kudos: 335
Status:Math and DI Expert
Location: India
Concentration: Human Resources, General Management
GMAT Focus 1: 735 Q90 V89 DI81
Products:
My Reviews
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 735 Q90 V89 DI81
Posts: 11,238
Kudos: 43,702
It s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic 08 Dec 2019, 20:25
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
DealMakerOne
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.
Show more

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
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 18,832
Own Kudos:
986
Posts: 18,832
Kudos: 986
It s a well-known fact that a person in a state of alcoholic 01 Aug 2024, 09:34
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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.
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
miag
188 posts