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

It is currently 22 Apr 2019, 23:22

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

Journalist : In late 1994, the present government of the Republic of

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

Hide Tags

 
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 25 Mar 2008
Posts: 38
Journalist : In late 1994, the present government of the Republic of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Jul 2010, 19:59
3
7
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  35% (medium)

Question Stats:

72% (01:40) correct 28% (01:48) wrong based on 570 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Journalist: In late 1994, the present government of the Republic of Bellam came into power. Each year since then, about thirty journalists have been imprisoned for printing articles that criticize the government. In 1994, under the old government, only six journalists were imprisoned for criticizing the government. So the old government was more tolerant of criticism by the press than the new one is.

Politician: But in 1994 only six journalists criticized the government, and now journalists routinely do.

The politician challenges the journalist’s argument by doing which of the following?

(A) Presenting data that extend further into the past than the journalist’s data
(B) Introducing evidence that undermines an assumption of the journalist’s argument
(C) Questioning the accuracy of the evidence presented in support of the journalist’s conclusion
(D) Pointing out that the argument illegitimately draws a general conclusion on the basis of a sample of only a few cases
(E) Stating that the argument treats information about some members of a group as if it applied to all members of that group

I don't understand Politician's remark . Is that a challenge ? he just said "...and now journalists routinely do."

I don't get whether its challenge ....how come it be a challenge ? it looks to me he is supporting the journalist's remark that "....Each year since then" routine task.

I'm confused here. please help at this part.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 87
Re: Journalist : In late 1994, the present government of the Republic of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Jul 2010, 20:55
1
both B and C are close. will rule out C coz the politician is not questioning the accuracy of the evidence presented by the journalist. The politician agrees that since 1994 thirty journalists under the new govt and in 1994 six journalists under the old govt were imprisoned, howevr he undermines journalist’s assumption by introducing evidence that now journalists routinely criticize govt.
_________________
consider cudos if you like my post
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 11 May 2010
Posts: 150
Re: Journalist : In late 1994, the present government of the Republic of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Jul 2010, 00:51
4
Well, in 1994, the percentage is 6/6 = 100%. The Old Gov "kills" 100% those who dare defy.

After 1994, about 30 die every year, but "rountinely do" mean that a lot of jounarlists do nowday (a lot, like 100s), so the percentage is < 100%.

Thus actually, the new Gov is more tolerant than the old one.

This is what B implies.

B rules
Verbal Forum Moderator
avatar
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 366
WE 1: 4 years Tech
Re: Journalist : In late 1994, the present government of the Republic of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Dec 2010, 01:44
This is a Find the assumption question . We must find the Assumption in the Journalists argument by reading the Politicians statement.
We mustnt complicate the question by bringing in numbers and percentages.
The Journalist is simply assuming that the same number of people who protested against the old regime as the number in the subsequent years in protest against the new one
_________________
My Post Invites Discussions not answers
Try to give back something to the Forum.I want your explanations, right now !
Please let me know your opinion about the Chandigarh Gmat Centrehttp://gmatclub.com/forum/gmat-experience-at-chandigarh-india-centre-111830.html
Intern
Intern
User avatar
Joined: 09 Jun 2013
Posts: 49
GMAT 1: 680 Q49 V33
GMAT 2: 690 Q49 V34
GPA: 3.86
WE: Analyst (Advertising and PR)
Re: Journalist : In late 1994, the present government of the Republic of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Aug 2013, 01:34
1
Let me help you with this one. This is the flaw in the reasoning question.

(E) Stating that the argument treats information about some members of a group as if it applied to all members of that group. In other words, it means that the argument contains the error of taking small examples of one group and treating these example to support a general conclusion about that group. To illustrate, "two of my best friends went to watch a soccer match. Therefore, all of my best friends went to watch that soccer match." This error is called over-generalization.

(C) Questioning the accuracy of the evidence presented in support of the journalist’s conclusion. This choice is incorrect because the politician accepts the evidence from the journalist that in 1994, only six journalists were imprisoned for criticizing the government.
_________________
Don't be afraid to fail, but be afraid not to try
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 21 Aug 2012
Posts: 105
Re: Journalist : In late 1994, the present government of the Republic of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Aug 2013, 02:26
Juz2play wrote:
Let me help you with this one. This is the flaw in the reasoning question.

(E) Stating that the argument treats information about some members of a group as if it applied to all members of that group. In other words, it means that the argument contains the error of taking small examples of one group and treating these example to support a general conclusion about that group. To illustrate, "two of my best friends went to watch a soccer match. Therefore, all of my best friends went to watch that soccer match." This error is called over-generalization.

(C) Questioning the accuracy of the evidence presented in support of the journalist’s conclusion. This choice is incorrect because the politician accepts the evidence from the journalist that in 1994, only six journalists were imprisoned for criticizing the government.



Hi,

For E...
That is what the argument says:
Journalist says: In1994,under old govt. six journalist were imprisoned.
Since 1994, under new govt. 30 journalist were imprisoned.

Politician: In 1994, it was 6/6 case.
Since 1994, it is not 30/30 case.. it could be 30/100.

Hence , under new govt. journalist have advantage.

This is what E talks about. it says that
(E) Stating that the argument treats information about some members of a group as if it applied to all members of that group.
some 30 is the some members of the group(100).. and journalist assumes that 30/30 is applied to all members of that group..

To reiterate: Politician replies by Stating that information is regarding some ppl out of the group and does not apply to all members of that group...


Still unclear why E is incorrect...

Experts please help..!!!

Thanks,
Jai
_________________
MODULUS Concept ---> http://gmatclub.com/forum/inequalities-158054.html#p1257636
HEXAGON Theory ---> http://gmatclub.com/forum/hexagon-theory-tips-to-solve-any-heaxgon-question-158189.html#p1258308
Retired Moderator
User avatar
Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Posts: 1006
Location: United States
Re: Journalist : In late 1994, the present government of the Republic of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 20 Aug 2013, 15:41
jaituteja wrote:
Juz2play wrote:
Let me help you with this one. This is the flaw in the reasoning question.

(E) Stating that the argument treats information about some members of a group as if it applied to all members of that group. In other words, it means that the argument contains the error of taking small examples of one group and treating these example to support a general conclusion about that group. To illustrate, "two of my best friends went to watch a soccer match. Therefore, all of my best friends went to watch that soccer match." This error is called over-generalization.

(C) Questioning the accuracy of the evidence presented in support of the journalist’s conclusion. This choice is incorrect because the politician accepts the evidence from the journalist that in 1994, only six journalists were imprisoned for criticizing the government.



Hi,

For E...
That is what the argument says:
Journalist says: In1994,under old govt. six journalist were imprisoned.
Since 1994, under new govt. 30 journalist were imprisoned.

Politician: In 1994, it was 6/6 case.
Since 1994, it is not 30/30 case.. it could be 30/100.

Hence , under new govt. journalist have advantage.

This is what E talks about. it says that
(E) Stating that the argument treats information about some members of a group as if it applied to all members of that group.
some 30 is the some members of the group(100).. and journalist assumes that 30/30 is applied to all members of that group..

To reiterate: Politician replies by Stating that information is regarding some ppl out of the group and does not apply to all members of that group...


Still unclear why E is incorrect...

Experts please help..!!!

Thanks,
Jai


Dear Jai

You read the politician's argument too fast, I guess. Thus, you misunderstood the idea of the politician a bit.

Politician: But in 1994 only six journalists criticized the government, and now journalists routinely do

Note: routinely is frequently

Be careful with the blue part. What does he mean? The politician challenges the journalist who said more journalist imprisoned, less tolerant the Government was. It means the journalist just focused on the number of journalists imprisoned, but the politician does not agree with that. He maintained that the number of journalists imprisoned may be THE SAME (6 people), but these journalists criticized the government MORE FREQUENTLY. --> Thus, there were more cases of journalists imprisoned than in 1994.

Let see E:
E is not the main point that the politician wanted to convey. In fact, he may agree that six journalists imprisoned is a total group (100% as you said). He just criticized the assumption of the journalist who concerned about the number rather than the frequency.

Hence, E is not the answer.

Hope it helps.
_________________
Please +1 KUDO if my post helps. Thank you.

"Designing cars consumes you; it has a hold on your spirit which is incredibly powerful. It's not something you can do part time, you have do it with all your heart and soul or you're going to get it wrong."

Chris Bangle - Former BMW Chief of Design.
Non-Human User
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 4106
Re: Journalist : In late 1994, the present government of the Republic of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 21 Mar 2019, 09:36
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.
_________________
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Journalist : In late 1994, the present government of the Republic of   [#permalink] 21 Mar 2019, 09:36
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Journalist : In late 1994, the present government of the Republic of

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


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®.