Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 07:07 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 07:07
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
 1   2   3   
655-705 Level|   Method of Reasoning|         
User avatar
JCLEONES
User avatar
Joined: 01 Nov 2007
Last visit: 13 Jan 2017
Posts: 93
Own Kudos:
2,527
 [260]
Posts: 93
Kudos: 2,527
 [260]
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low Updated on: 07 Jun 2018, 16:23
Originally posted by JCLEONES on 14 Jan 2008, 12:32.
Last edited by BillyZ on 07 Jun 2018, 16:23, edited 5 times in total.
Renamed the topic and edited the question.
23
Kudos
Add Kudos
237
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:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

56% (01:49) correct 44% (02:07) wrong based on 4807 sessions

History

Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low to attract the best Candidates to the job. The legislature’s move to raise the salary has done nothing to improve the situation, because it was coupled with a ban on receiving money for lectures and teaching engagements.

Pat: No, the raise in salary really does improve the situation. Since very few judges teach or give lectures, the ban will have little or no negative effect.

Pat’s response to Mel is inadequate in that it

(A) attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members

(B) mistakenly takes the cause of a certain change to be an effect of that change

(C) attempts to argue that a certain change will have a positive effect merely by pointing to the absence of negative effects

(D) simply denies Mel’s claim without putting forward any evidence in support of that denial

(E) assumes that changes that benefit the most able members of a group necessarily benefit all members of that group
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
A
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
pqhai
User avatar
Retired Moderator
Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Last visit: 26 Nov 2015
Posts: 867
Own Kudos:
8,883
 [94]
Given Kudos: 123
Location: United States
Posts: 867
Kudos: 8,883
 [94]
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 24 Aug 2013, 22:33
70
Kudos
Add Kudos
23
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi Punyata
Welcome to gmat club :) I'm glad to help.

ANALYZE THE STIMULUS:

Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low to attract the best Candidates [potential candidates] to the job. The legislature’s move to raise the salary has done nothing to improve the situation, because it was coupled with a ban on receiving money for lectures and teaching engagements.
Pat: No, the raise in salary really does improve the situation. Since very few judges [current members] teach or give lectures, the ban will have little or no negative effect

Pat’s response to Mel is inadequate in that it

ANALYZE EACH ANSWER:

A. attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members.
Correct. Mel talks about potential candidates, however Pat talks about current members

B. mistakenly takes the cause of a certain change to be an effect of that change
Wrong. The argument does NOT talk about the cause of a change (the legislature’s move to raise the salary).

C. attempts to argue that a certain change will have a positive effect merely by pointing to the absence of negative effects
Wrong. Pat just says the ban will have little or no negative effect. He does NOT talk anything about positive effect.

D. simply denies Mel’s claim without putting forward any evidence in support of that denial
Wrong. TEMPTING but wrong. Pat denies Mel’s claim WITH evidence in support. However, his evidence has problem itself.

E. assumes that changes that benefit the most able members of a group necessarily benefit all members of that group.
Wrong. TEMPTING but wrong. Pat said the change does NOT hurt (will have little or no negative effect) the current member. He did NOT say the change BENEFITS the current member. These logics are totally different..
For example: The new shopping outlet does not have negative effect to shopping malls in downtown. ==> It does not mean the new shopping outlet has positive effect to shopping malls in downtown.

TAKE AWAY:
Be aware of reverse logics
A does NOT hurt B ==> does not mean A supports B
A does NOT support B ==> does not mean A hurts B

Hope it helps.
User avatar
ReedArnoldMPREP
User avatar
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 30 Apr 2021
Last visit: 20 Dec 2024
Posts: 521
Own Kudos:
536
 [21]
Given Kudos: 37
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V47
Posts: 521
Kudos: 536
 [21]
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low Updated on: 01 Feb 2022, 12:36
Originally posted by ReedArnoldMPREP on 07 Jan 2022, 08:41.
Last edited by ReedArnoldMPREP on 01 Feb 2022, 12:36, edited 1 time in total.
18
Kudos
Add Kudos
3
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Mavisdu1017
I went through the explanation above, but still confused.
As Pat said "the raise in salary really does improve the situation"--->I think this is the positive effect he referred to
But he didn't give any evidence to show how the situation is improved, instead he just said "the ban has no negative effect"
So I don't know where Option C is wrong? Hope expert helps! Thx
Show more

It might help to see a different argument made that uses the same logic. Let's pretend Mel and Pat are two owners of a popular sports franchize.

Mel: We need to get better players. We don't offer high enough pay to get the best players to join our team. You want to raise the amount of money we offer, but that's not helpful, because at the same time you're putting it in the contract that they aren't allowed be in commercials!"

"Pat: That doesn't matter. Our players aren't in commercials anyway."

Written like this, the problem might be more obvious. "Wait, Pat... we're not talking about our *current* players. We're trying to get *new* players. Maybe those players really want to be in commercials. Maybe our players aren't in commercials because they aren't good enough to merit such business opportunities. If you don't allow the new, best players to be in commercials, they STILL won't play for us, even if our salary increases..."

C is very tempting. But the absence of negative effects isn't really Pat's flaw. Plus, Pat acknowledges there could be '*little* negative effect.' He doesn't outright argue there will be *no* negative effect (and that's what 'absence' means... You have to be very literal with GMAT language! "An absence of a negative effect" doesn't mean "The negatives are so miniscule it's worth it." It actually means "There is *no* negative effect." Pat does say that might be possible, but he also says there could be a *small* negative effect, but he clearly thinks it's so small it doesn't matter.

But it DOES matter. Because while it might be only a 'little' negative effect for CURRENT judges, it could be a HUGE negative effect for the NEW judges, the 'best candidates,' they are attempting to recruit.
General Discussion
User avatar
marcodonzelli
User avatar
Joined: 22 Nov 2007
Last visit: 22 Aug 2014
Posts: 627
Own Kudos:
3,192
 [4]
Posts: 627
Kudos: 3,192
 [4]
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 23 Jan 2008, 05:56
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
[quote="JCLEONES"]Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low to attract the best
Candidates to the job. The legislature’s move to raise the salary has done nothing to improve the situation, because it was coupled with a ban on receiving money for lectures and teaching engagements.

Pat: No, the raise in salary really does improve the situation. Since very few
judges teach or give lectures, the ban will have little or no negative
effect.

Pat’s response to Mel is inadequate in that it

A. attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members
of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members.
I think it's the best choice since the evaluation from Pat take into account only the current members. maybe the change will affect potential members. Is it OA?

B. mistakenly takes the cause of a certain change to be an effect of that change
I have some doubts regarding this choice but I actually don't see cause-effect relationship in the Pat's thought
C. attempts to argue that a certain change will have a positive effect merely
by pointing to the absence of negative effects

the absence of negative effects is the core of the argument
D. simply denies Mel’s claim without putting forward any evidence in support
of that denial

that's falseE. assumes that changes that benefit the most able members of a group
necessarily benefit all members of that group. false
User avatar
zaarathelab
User avatar
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
Last visit: 14 Feb 2012
Posts: 112
Own Kudos:
1,454
 [7]
Given Kudos: 25
Posts: 112
Kudos: 1,454
 [7]
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 26 Jan 2010, 10:38
5
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low to attract the best
Candidates to the job. The legislature’s move to raise the salary has
done nothing to improve the situation, because it was coupled with
a ban on receiving money for lectures and teaching engagements.

Pat: No, the raise in salary really does improve the situation. Since very few
judges teach or give lectures, the ban will have little or no negative
effect.

Pat’s response to Mel is inadequate in that it

A. attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members
of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members.CORRECT. Usage of WILL in the last sentence
B. mistakenly takes the cause of a certain change to be an effect of that changeINCORRECT
C. attempts to argue that a certain change will have a positive effect merely
by pointing to the absence of negative effectsPat says that the ban will have little OR no negative effectsTherefore, he does not entirely rule out the effects (negative or other). Just points to the gravity of the effects
D. simply denies Mel’s claim without putting forward any evidence in support
of that denialINCORRECT
E. assumes that changes that benefit the most able members of a group
necessarily benefit all members of that group.There is no connection between delivering lectures and ability of the judges

I initially picked C. But OA given is A and hence I formulated the above reasoning
User avatar
BMindful
User avatar
Joined: 28 Sep 2009
Last visit: 08 Mar 2010
Posts: 24
Own Kudos:
68
Given Kudos: 2
Posts: 24
Kudos: 68
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 27 Jan 2010, 23:29
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
As to why the answer is NOT C: Pat doesn't say that there is positive effect (there is little or no negative effect)
User avatar
jeeteshsingh
User avatar
Joined: 22 Dec 2009
Last visit: 03 Aug 2023
Posts: 177
Own Kudos:
1,001
 [3]
Given Kudos: 48
Posts: 177
Kudos: 1,001
 [3]
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 27 Jan 2010, 23:36
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low to attract the best
Candidates to the job. The legislature’s move to raise the salary has
done nothing to improve the situation, because it was coupled with
a ban on receiving money for lectures and teaching engagements.

Pat: No, the raise in salary really does improve the situation. Since very few
judges teach or give lectures, the ban will have little or no negative
effect.

Pat’s response to Mel is inadequate in that it

A. attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members
of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members.
B. mistakenly takes the cause of a certain change to be an effect of that change
C. attempts to argue that a certain change will have a positive effect merely
by pointing to the absence of negative effects
D. simply denies Mel’s claim without putting forward any evidence in support
of that denial
E. assumes that changes that benefit the most able members of a group
necessarily benefit all members of that group.

Would go with A.... as the same is best option. Pat does give his analysis on checking the current members of the group being discussed. He doesn't take into account the future aspect of it... What if more judges begin to teach!!!

E was a close contender but the wording talks about most able members.... this implies that judges who do not teach are most able and hence this is incorrect.

Hence A should be correct...
User avatar
d3thknell
User avatar
Joined: 02 Mar 2011
Last visit: 11 Nov 2020
Posts: 42
Own Kudos:
73
Given Kudos: 42
Posts: 42
Kudos: 73
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 22 Apr 2011, 01:47
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
the new legislature move proposes increasing the salary of judges(positive move) and also banning them from receiving money from lectures/teachings(negative move).

Pat believes their since their are very few judges existing judges who give lectures,the effect of -ve move is almost neglible.
this reasoning is flawed because it is taking into account only the existing group and not the prospective judges.
option A addresses this point

while option C says that Pat's reasoning is flawed because he "attempts to argue that a certain change will have a positive effect merely
by pointing to the absence of negative effects"
"C" ASSUMES that Pat is right when he talks about "absence of negative effects",when it is clear that new rule DOES have negative effects(ie new rule isnt taking into consideration the potential members,who might have problem with 2nd part of new rule,which discourages them from joining the profession).
avatar
KeshavKunal
avatar
Joined: 15 Jul 2013
Last visit: 09 Oct 2017
Posts: 1
Own Kudos:
8
 [8]
Posts: 1
Kudos: 8
 [8]
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 15 Jul 2013, 13:44
4
Kudos
Add Kudos
4
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
to attract the best candidates to the job - so we(well, Mel, but it is good to be sympathetic to the argument) are looking for what is favored by potential candidates and do not care about what current members do.

And Pat simply talks about current judges.

So, reading through choices was a breeze and I immediately chose A.

But I admit this problem is bit tricky. I tutor GMAT and two of my brighter students who recently tried this problem got it wrong. So, let me illustrate a fail-safe elimination based approach if one missed this critical fact during the first reading that the argument is about future candidates. Let's say we are simply looking for why raise in salary cant compensate ban on teaching although few judges teach.

A. the word 'potential' should make us think that we missed something. Good if you see connection. But if you don't, at least the second half of choice is spot on ie. Pat does provide evidence about effect on current members. So, don't eliminate even if your eyes don't light up

B, D - clearly wrong.

C - tempting choice..come back to it.
E - doesn't have much to say. increase in salary benefits all members and nothing being said about 'most able' members - so kinda illogical.

Reviewing choices C and A, Pat does admit to negative effects and does not deny them. So, C is wrong.

But, to be sure of the answer, at least at this stage of carefully re-reading the choice and perhaps glancing at the argument again, the word 'potential' should click.
User avatar
aks456
User avatar
Joined: 20 Jul 2012
Last visit: 18 Aug 2016
Posts: 88
Own Kudos:
154
Given Kudos: 559
Location: India
WE:Information Technology (Computer Software)
Posts: 88
Kudos: 154
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 28 May 2014, 14:54
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
JCLEONES
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low to attract the best
Candidates to the job. The legislature’s move to raise the salary has done nothing to improve the situation, because it was coupled with a ban on receiving money for lectures and teaching engagements.

Pat: No, the raise in salary really does improve the situation. Since very few
judges teach or give lectures, the ban will have little or no negative
effect.

Pat’s response to Mel is inadequate in that it

A. attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members
of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members.
B. mistakenly takes the cause of a certain change to be an effect of that change
C. attempts to argue that a certain change will have a positive effect merely
by pointing to the absence of negative effects
D. simply denies Mel’s claim without putting forward any evidence in support
of that denial
E. assumes that changes that benefit the most able members of a group
necessarily benefit all members of that group.
Show more
Looking at options A and C
Though i agree withexplanation given by d3thknell that C" ASSUMES that Pat is right when he talks about "absence of negative effects",when it is clear that new rule DOES have negative effects(ie new rule isnt taking into consideration the potential members,who might have problem with 2nd part of new rule,which discourages them from joining the profession).
But I dont completely agree with Choice A too.. choice "A" mentions "By Providing Evidence"..But there is no evidence mentioned. Can someone please clarify?
User avatar
lolopolo
User avatar
Joined: 30 Sep 2013
Last visit: 02 Jul 2015
Posts: 23
Own Kudos:
1
Given Kudos: 8
Concentration: Healthcare, Technology
Schools: Duke '17 (D) Ross '17 (WL) Kenan-Flagler '17 (A)
Schools: Duke '17 (D) Ross '17 (WL) Kenan-Flagler '17 (A)
Posts: 23
Kudos: 1
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 21 Nov 2014, 14:16
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Can someone clarify for me too, why option C is incorrect? All explanations in favor of option A or against option C I read before don't seem convincing enough. The source of this question is GmatPrep Exam Pack 1, so it is crucial for me to understand testmaker's logic here.
User avatar
sowragu
User avatar
Joined: 25 Dec 2012
Last visit: 26 Apr 2016
Posts: 103
Own Kudos:
127
 [1]
Given Kudos: 148
Posts: 103
Kudos: 127
 [1]
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 21 Nov 2014, 19:38
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
pretzel
I don't understand why the OA is A either.
Show more

Even I chose the wrong answer initially. After going through the forum feel A is better choice. Here is my view on A.

Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low to attract the best
Candidates to the job. - This line states that Currently Judges are involved in some other profession rather to be as judges since the pay scale is less The legislature’s move to raise the salary has done nothing to improve the situation, because it was coupled with a ban on receiving money for lectures and teaching engagements.This line states that the more eligible candidate to be judges has chosen the profession as Teaching.

Pat: No, the raise in salary really does improve the situation. Since very few
judges teach or give lectures, the ban will have little or no negative
effect. -- Pat is stating that "Since very few judges" --> he is talking about currently who ever is performing the role of a judge. But Mel statement is based on the candidate who are currently involved in teaching profession

Pat’s response to Mel is inadequate in that it

A. attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members
of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members. --> Based on above desc, A fits in to it perfectly
B. mistakenly takes the cause of a certain change to be an effect of that change
C. attempts to argue that a certain change will have a positive effect merely
by pointing to the absence of negative effects
D. simply denies Mel’s claim without putting forward any evidence in support
of that denial
E. assumes that changes that benefit the most able members of a group
necessarily benefit all members of that group.
User avatar
akhil911
User avatar
Joined: 11 Aug 2011
Last visit: 29 Jan 2018
Posts: 130
Own Kudos:
1,860
Given Kudos: 886
Location: United States
Concentration: Economics, Finance
Schools: CBS '17 Haas '17 Anderson '17 HKUST '16 Booth '17 Sloan '17 Stern '17 Yale '17 Kenan-Flagler '17 (S) Ross '17 (S) Kelley '17 (S) NUS '17 HEC Dec '17 Jones '16
GMAT Date: 10-16-2013
GPA: 3
WE:Analyst (Computer Software)
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: CBS '17 Haas '17 Anderson '17 HKUST '16 Booth '17 Sloan '17 Stern '17 Yale '17 Kenan-Flagler '17 (S) Ross '17 (S) Kelley '17 (S) NUS '17 HEC Dec '17 Jones '16
Posts: 130
Kudos: 1,860
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 13 Dec 2014, 11:23
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The answer to this question will come when we asses how Pat gave response to Mei.
Mei says that best candidates will still not be attracted some benefits have been removed that have been compensated by an increase in salary but this will have little incentive for able candidates to join now.
Pat replies that the salary increase does improve the situation as few judges give lectures.
Pat actually says that the increase in salary will attract candidates ( but he does not talk about the whether able candidates will still be attracted or not).


A. attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members.
-- Correct for the reason stated above.
B. mistakenly takes the cause of a certain change to be an effect of that change
-- There is no cause and affect in this argument.
C. attempts to argue that a certain change will have a positive effect merely by pointing to the absence of negative effects.
-- Out of scope.
D. simply denies Mel’s claim without putting forward any evidence in support of that denial
-- Out of scope.
E. assumes that changes that benefit the most able members of a group necessarily benefit all members of that group.
-- This is actually the opposite of how Pat replied.
avatar
anujchowdhary92
avatar
Joined: 05 Aug 2015
Last visit: 09 Dec 2018
Posts: 12
Own Kudos:
20
Given Kudos: 19
Location: India
GMAT 1: 570 Q42 V26
GMAT 2: 620 Q47 V29
GMAT 3: 700 Q48 V38
WE:Engineering (Manufacturing)
GMAT 3: 700 Q48 V38
Posts: 12
Kudos: 20
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 30 Jan 2016, 03:24
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
zaarathelab
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low to attract the best Candidates to the job. The legislature’s move to raise the salary has done nothing to improve the situation, because it was coupled with a ban on receiving money for lectures and teaching engagements.

Pat: No, the raise in salary really does improve the situation. Since very few judges teach or give lectures, the ban will have little or no negative effect.

Pat’s response to Mel is inadequate in that it

A. attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members.
B. mistakenly takes the cause of a certain change to be an effect of that change
C. attempts to argue that a certain change will have a positive effect merely by pointing to the absence of negative effects
D. simply denies Mel’s claim without putting forward any evidence in support of that denial
E. assumes that changes that benefit the most able members of a group necessarily benefit all members of that group.
Show more

A : Correct . Pat's response that very few judges teach is based on the current lot of judges. This is the very thing that Mel is advocating to change, since, they the current lot is inefficient.
B : Incorrect. Inability of judges to lecture or teach is not the basis of this change.
C : Incorrect. Pat does not give any evidence of positive effect.
D : Incorrect. Pat does not deny Mel's claim, he simply says the ban is of liitle or no consequence.
E : Incorrect . No talk of benefit to every member due to the change.
avatar
manlog
avatar
Joined: 08 Jan 2015
Last visit: 20 Aug 2018
Posts: 47
Own Kudos:
61
Given Kudos: 53
Schools: Stanford '19 Kellogg '19 (A)
Schools: Stanford '19 Kellogg '19 (A)
Posts: 47
Kudos: 61
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 24 Jul 2016, 01:45
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Very nice question! Mel says that some changes will fail to increase the attractiveness of the job for potential employees. Pat says, that the ban has no effect on current employees. So the answer is A.
User avatar
aniketm.87@gmail.com
User avatar
Joined: 17 Sep 2015
Last visit: 19 Nov 2016
Posts: 67
Own Kudos:
803
 [1]
Given Kudos: 155
Posts: 67
Kudos: 803
 [1]
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 30 Jul 2016, 09:21
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low to attract the best Candidates to the job. The legislature’s move to raise the salary has done nothing to improve the situation, because it was coupled with a ban on receiving money for lectures and teaching engagements.

Pat: No, the raise in salary really does improve the situation. Since very few judges teach or give lectures, the ban will have little or no negative effect.

Pat’s response to Mel is inadequate in that it

A. attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members.
B. mistakenly takes the cause of a certain change to be an effect of that change
C. attempts to argue that a certain change will have a positive effect merely by pointing to the absence of negative effects
D. simply denies Mel’s claim without putting forward any evidence in support of that denial
E. assumes that changes that benefit the most able members of a group necessarily benefit all members of that group.

In order to answer such Questions look for the unstated assumption.

M : Premise 1 : salary not enough.
Premise 2 : salary increased but judges not allowed to earn from teaching assignments.
Conclusion : Income still not enough
Assumption : because earlier there were no restrictions on earning from teaching assignments but now there is

Example : Earlier avg judge salary 100k
teaching assignments etc : avg pay : 20k
avg total income : 120k

Now judges avg salary : 110k
other income from teaching assignments etc : 0
Total avg= 110k

P : Premise : Most judges currently dont take extra teaching assignments/lectures. So little -ve effect or no -ve effect
Conclusion : salary enough after increase
Assumption : No option in the future to earn more from teaching assignments (even required by the judges). Current solution not considering the future judges and their potential need to earn more


A. attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members.
potential members and current members, what the differnce ? P talks about most current judges (Not good enough(
B. mistakenly takes the cause of a certain change to be an effect of that change
Not relevant
C. attempts to argue that a certain change will have a positive effect merely by pointing to the absence of negative effects
But pat does point out the -ve effects, he just says that little or no impact due to it
D. simply denies Mel’s claim without putting forward any evidence in support of that denial
P does put evidence forth "most judges dont take lectures"
E. assumes that changes that benefit the most able members of a group necessarily benefit all members of that group.
Bingo!! exactly our assumption, hence our answer

BTW i got it wrong in my test, but only cuz i was running out time. I doubt this is 700 level Q
User avatar
Adyy96
User avatar
Joined: 13 Jun 2016
Last visit: 09 May 2019
Posts: 16
Own Kudos:
12
 [2]
Given Kudos: 47
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V48
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V48
Posts: 16
Kudos: 12
 [2]
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 02 Aug 2016, 13:19
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low to attract the best Candidates to the job. The legislature’s move to raise the salary has done nothing to improve the situation, because it was coupled with a ban on receiving money for lectures and teaching engagements.

Pat: No, the raise in salary really does improve the situation. Since very few judges teach or give lectures, the ban will have little or no negative effect.

Pat’s response to Mel is inadequate in that it

A. attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members.
B. mistakenly takes the cause of a certain change to be an effect of that change
C. attempts to argue that a certain change will have a positive effect merely by pointing to the absence of negative effects
D. simply denies Mel’s claim without putting forward any evidence in support of that denial
E. assumes that changes that benefit the most able members of a group necessarily benefit all members of that group.



I did it by process of elimination
My answer is A

Why not B?
The cause and effect relationship in his statement is completely sound.

Why not C?
He did'nt straight away said that there will no negative effect (absence of negative effects), instead he points of towards the possibility that there may be "little or no negative effect". (if little was not there then this was a good option)

Why not D?
He did give evidence that very few judges are involved in teaching and lectures.

Why not E?
This is completely irrelevant, no where stated.


I am not sure about why A should be right
Can anyone help?

And if you liked my explanations kudos please :)
User avatar
VKat
User avatar
Joined: 15 Jun 2016
Last visit: 16 Oct 2025
Posts: 91
Own Kudos:
24
Given Kudos: 741
Posts: 91
Kudos: 24
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 03 May 2017, 10:40
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Expert,
Could you clearly specify why option A is better answer over option C?
User avatar
abhimahna
User avatar
Board of Directors
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Last visit: 06 Jul 2024
Posts: 3,514
Own Kudos:
5,728
 [1]
Given Kudos: 346
Status:Emory Goizueta Alum
Products:
My Reviews
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 3,514
Kudos: 5,728
 [1]
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 03 May 2017, 10:52
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
VKat
Expert,
Could you clearly specify why option A is better answer over option C?
Show more

Option C is wrong because it says PAT is saying there will be no Negative effect(See here: by pointing to the absence of negative effects).

But actually Pat said there may be little negative effect. So, we cannot ignore this little effect and say no negative effect.

Option A is right because It says PAT is giving assurance about future based on current situations. It may happen that in future there are many judges who start receiving money for lectures and teaching engagements. Hence, we can not say, this ban "will" have little or no negative effect.

I hope that makes sense. :)
User avatar
Nightmare007
User avatar
Joined: 26 Aug 2016
Last visit: 05 Aug 2020
Posts: 436
Own Kudos:
443
Given Kudos: 204
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, International Business
Schools: ISB '20 (M) Simon '21 (WL)
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V33
GMAT 2: 700 Q50 V33
GMAT 3: 730 Q51 V38
GPA: 4
WE:Information Technology (Consulting)
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: ISB '20 (M) Simon '21 (WL)
GMAT 3: 730 Q51 V38
Posts: 436
Kudos: 443
Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low 03 May 2017, 22:51
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A is my go. mel talks about besties while Pat gives the situation as a whole i. e. including everyone.

Sent from my ONE A2003 using GMAT Club Forum mobile app
 1   2   3   
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
miag
188 posts