Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 04:11 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 04:11
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
User avatar
Gmat750aspirant
Joined: 06 Jul 2024
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 277
Own Kudos:
168
 [1]
Given Kudos: 39
Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, General Management
WE:Asset Management (Computer Hardware)
Posts: 277
Kudos: 168
 [1]
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
napolean92728
User avatar
CAT Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Oct 2024
Last visit: 01 Nov 2025
Posts: 282
Own Kudos:
83
 [1]
Given Kudos: 228
Status:Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily.
Posts: 282
Kudos: 83
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
RiyaJ0032
Joined: 13 Dec 2021
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 201
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 53
Posts: 201
Kudos: 17
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
napolean92728
User avatar
CAT Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Oct 2024
Last visit: 01 Nov 2025
Posts: 282
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 228
Status:Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily.
Posts: 282
Kudos: 83
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
First, you need to understand the argument stating that "individuals who meditate regularly are less likely to engage in unethical actions, " so this is the point you need to weaken. So, if anything states that meditators and non-meditators have the same ethical behaviour, then it means that meditation doesn't help improve the ethical behaviour of any person, and their claim is wrong.

If you still didn't get it here's a more detailed explanation for you RiyaJ0032,

The spiritual leaders claim that meditation leads to increased moral behavior. This is a positive claim asserting a causal relationship: meditation → improved ethical behavior.
Answer choice A states that a study found meditators "do not demonstrate significantly different ethical behavior compared to non-meditators." This directly contradicts the spiritual leaders' claim because:
  1. If meditation truly caused increased moral behavior (as claimed), we would expect to see meditators demonstrating better ethical behavior than non-meditators.
  2. The study finding "no significant difference" means the expected improvement in ethical behavior was not observed, despite meditators having the claimed increase in self-awareness.
Your example with persons A and B actually highlights why answer A is correct. In your scenario:
  • Person A meditates
  • Person B doesn't meditate
  • Both help people equally (demonstrate the same ethical behavior)
This pattern of evidence is exactly what answer choice A describes, and it contradicts the spiritual leaders' argument. If meditation truly caused increased moral behavior, we would expect person A to demonstrate better ethical behavior than person B. The fact that they don't suggests meditation is not causing the claimed improvement in ethics.
The phrase "do not demonstrate significantly different ethical behavior" doesn't imply unethical behavior - it simply means there was no measurable improvement in ethical behavior among meditators. This directly weakens the claim that meditation leads to increased moral behavior.

I hope it's clear RiyaJ0032.

RiyaJ0032
what do you mean that not showing "improved ethical behavior" is evidence for demonstrating unethical behavior

this is illogical

let's say A meditates, B does not
A helps people around him
while B also does

both are doing ethical action, but A is not doing an ethical action "significantly different" than what B does

does this mean he engages in unethical behavior?

No

if some expert can clarify
Thanks

MartyMurray
GMATNinjaTwo


napolean92728
Answer: A
The correct answer is (A) A study found that individuals who meditate daily report higher self-awareness but do not demonstrate significantly different ethical behavior compared to non-meditators.

Explanation:
The argument claims that meditation leads to increased moral behavior by enhancing self-awareness and inner peace. Option A directly contradicts this causal relationship by providing evidence that while meditation does increase self-awareness (supporting part of the premise), it does not actually result in improved ethical behavior (contradicting the conclusion). This breaks the claimed connection between meditation and moral behavior, severely weakening the argument.

Why each other option is incorrect:
(B) This shows that some people misuse meditation, but doesn't weaken the general claim that meditation typically increases moral behavior. It only identifies exceptions rather than challenging the core relationship.
(C) This merely points out that different types of meditation exist with different focuses, but doesn't contradict the claim that meditation generally leads to more ethical behavior. It just qualifies the type of meditation being discussed.
(D) This statement is about non-meditators who are ethical, which doesn't address whether meditation increases moral behavior for those who do practice it. The existence of ethical non-meditators doesn't disprove that meditation could improve ethics for practitioners.
(E) While this shows examples that seem to contradict the conclusion, isolated cases of unethical meditators don't necessarily invalidate a general trend. These could be exceptions rather than evidence against the overall pattern claimed in the argument.
User avatar
RiyaJ0032
Joined: 13 Dec 2021
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 201
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 53
Posts: 201
Kudos: 17
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
the explanation given in the first 3 lines were little incomplete cause it still raised the doubt about how having the same ethical behavior is linked to meditators not having a less likelihood of unethical behavior

however, the explanation provided post that makes this absolutely clear
Thank you for a detailed explanation, napolean92728
napolean92728
First, you need to understand the argument stating that "individuals who meditate regularly are less likely to engage in unethical actions, " so this is the point you need to weaken. So, if anything states that meditators and non-meditators have the same ethical behaviour, then it means that meditation doesn't help improve the ethical behaviour of any person, and their claim is wrong.

If you still didn't get it here's a more detailed explanation for you RiyaJ0032,

The spiritual leaders claim that meditation leads to increased moral behavior. This is a positive claim asserting a causal relationship: meditation → improved ethical behavior.
Answer choice A states that a study found meditators "do not demonstrate significantly different ethical behavior compared to non-meditators." This directly contradicts the spiritual leaders' claim because:
  1. If meditation truly caused increased moral behavior (as claimed), we would expect to see meditators demonstrating better ethical behavior than non-meditators.
  2. The study finding "no significant difference" means the expected improvement in ethical behavior was not observed, despite meditators having the claimed increase in self-awareness.
Your example with persons A and B actually highlights why answer A is correct. In your scenario:
  • Person A meditates
  • Person B doesn't meditate
  • Both help people equally (demonstrate the same ethical behavior)
This pattern of evidence is exactly what answer choice A describes, and it contradicts the spiritual leaders' argument. If meditation truly caused increased moral behavior, we would expect person A to demonstrate better ethical behavior than person B. The fact that they don't suggests meditation is not causing the claimed improvement in ethics.
The phrase "do not demonstrate significantly different ethical behavior" doesn't imply unethical behavior - it simply means there was no measurable improvement in ethical behavior among meditators. This directly weakens the claim that meditation leads to increased moral behavior.

I hope it's clear RiyaJ0032.

RiyaJ0032
what do you mean that not showing "improved ethical behavior" is evidence for demonstrating unethical behavior

this is illogical

let's say A meditates, B does not
A helps people around him
while B also does

both are doing ethical action, but A is not doing an ethical action "significantly different" than what B does

does this mean he engages in unethical behavior?

No

if some expert can clarify
Thanks

MartyMurray
GMATNinjaTwo


napolean92728
Answer: A
The correct answer is (A) A study found that individuals who meditate daily report higher self-awareness but do not demonstrate significantly different ethical behavior compared to non-meditators.

Explanation:
The argument claims that meditation leads to increased moral behavior by enhancing self-awareness and inner peace. Option A directly contradicts this causal relationship by providing evidence that while meditation does increase self-awareness (supporting part of the premise), it does not actually result in improved ethical behavior (contradicting the conclusion). This breaks the claimed connection between meditation and moral behavior, severely weakening the argument.

Why each other option is incorrect:
(B) This shows that some people misuse meditation, but doesn't weaken the general claim that meditation typically increases moral behavior. It only identifies exceptions rather than challenging the core relationship.
(C) This merely points out that different types of meditation exist with different focuses, but doesn't contradict the claim that meditation generally leads to more ethical behavior. It just qualifies the type of meditation being discussed.
(D) This statement is about non-meditators who are ethical, which doesn't address whether meditation increases moral behavior for those who do practice it. The existence of ethical non-meditators doesn't disprove that meditation could improve ethics for practitioners.
(E) While this shows examples that seem to contradict the conclusion, isolated cases of unethical meditators don't necessarily invalidate a general trend. These could be exceptions rather than evidence against the overall pattern claimed in the argument.
User avatar
SwethaReddyL
Joined: 28 Nov 2023
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 60
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 264
Location: India
Posts: 60
Kudos: 10
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
@gmatninja, karishmaB - would really like your 2 cents please

Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Critical Reasoning (CR) Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
188 posts