Ms. Eva Rose argued that money and time invested in acquiring a profes

Question

Ms. Eva Rose argued that money and time invested in acquiring a professional degree are totally wasted. As evidence supporting her argument, she offered the case of a man who, at considerable expense of money and time, completed his law degree and then married and lived as a house-husband, taking care of their children and working part time at a day care center so his wife could pursue her career.

Ms. Rose makes the unsupported assumption that

(A) an education in the law is useful only in pursuing law-related activities
(B) what was not acceptable 25 years ago may very well be acceptable today
(C) wealth is more important than learning
(D) professional success is a function of the quality of one's education
(E) only the study of law can be considered professional study

gmatdordie · Answer

Ms. Eva Rose argued that money and time invested in acquiring a professional degree are totally wasted. As evidence supporting her argument, she offered the case of a man who, at considerable expense of money and time, completed his law degree and then married and lived as a house-husband, taking care of their children and working part time at a day care center so his wife could pursue her career.

Ms. Rose makes the unsupported assumption that

(A) an education in the law is useful only in pursuing law-related activities
(B) what was not acceptable 25 years ago may very well be acceptable today
(C) wealth is more important than learning
(D) professional success is a function of the quality of one's education
(E) only the study of law can be considered professional study

if we negate the C, conclusion( any money spent on degree is a invetsmnet and should have return in monetory terms) will break, hence OA -C

ShaliniShalini · Answer

Can anyone please explain OA - A?

saury2k · Answer

Try negating A, an education in the law is useful not only in pursuing law-related activities, this breaks the whole argument apart. The conclusion: The "time invested in acquiring a professional degree are totally wasted" because the person is not using that knowledge anymore.

CuriosStud · Answer

Ms. Eva Rose argued that money and time invested in acquiring a professional degree are totally wasted. As evidence supporting her argument, she offered the case of a man who, at considerable expense of money and time, completed his law degree and then married and lived as a house-husband, taking care of their children and working part time at a day care center so his wife could pursue her career.

She Says that both time and money are wasted in acquiring professional education. How does she justify this? By stating example that a man who invested his time and money acquiring professional law degree later become a house husband.So according to her had he not been working as a house husband, he would have utilized his time and money efficiently. Only option A tells this

(B) what was not acceptable 25 years ago may very well be acceptable today - No mention of comparison over the years
(C) wealth is more important than learning - She says that money is wasted acquiring only professional education and not learning as a whole ; Its not there is no mention of importance of money anyways
(D) professional success is a function of the quality of one's education - rather she says professional success need not be dependent on education
(E) only the study of law can be considered professional study - No its just an example thus this is not an answer

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Official Explanation

There are two weaknesses in Ms. Rose’s argument. One will be treated in the explanation of the following question—she reaches a very general conclusion on the basis of one example. We are concerned for the moment with the second weakness. Even if Rose had been able to cite numerous examples like the case she mentions, her argument would be weak because it overlooks the possibility that an education may be valuable even if it is not used to make a living.

Importantly, Rose may be correct in her criticism of the man she mentions—we need make no judgment about that—but the assumption is nonetheless unsupported in that she gives no arguments to support it.

(B)  plays on the superficial detail of the paragraph—the inversion of customary role models. But that is not relevant to the structure of the argument; the form could have been as easily shown using a woman with a law degree who decided to become a sailor, or a child who studied ballet but later decided to become a doctor.

(D)  also is totally beside the point. Rose never commits herself to so specific a conclusion. She simply says professional education is a waste; she never claims success is related to quality of education.

(E)  is wrong because Rose is making a general claim about professional education—the man with the law degree was used merely to illustrate her point.

(C)  is perhaps the second-best answer, but it is still not nearly as good as  (A) . The author’s objection is that the man she mentions did not use his law degree in a law-related field. She never suggests that such a degree should be used to make money. She might not have objected to his behavior if he had used the degree to work in a public interest capacity.

The correct answer is (A).

Hope it helps

VerbalBot · Answer

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.

Ms. Eva Rose argued that money and time invested in acquiring a profes

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

Ms. Eva Rose argued that money and time invested in acquiring a profes

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