Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
May 1212:00 PM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
Make the most of your break with the most realistic GMAT™ prep. Take up to $700 off select products.
May 1308:30 AM PDT
-09:30 AM PDT
In Episode 4 of our GMAT Ninja CR series, we tackle the most intimidating CR question type: Boldface & "Legalese" questions. If you've ever stared at an answer choice that reads, "The first is a consideration introduced to counter a position that...- May 14
08:30 AM PDT
-09:30 AM PDT
Most GMAT test-takers are intimidated by the hardest GMAT Verbal questions. In this session, Target Test Prep GMAT instructor Erika Tyler-John, a 100th percentile GMAT scorer, will show you how top scorers break down challenging Verbal questions..
02 Nov 2004, 00:38
Kudos
Bookmarks
N
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
(N/A)
Question Stats:
0% (00:00) correct
0%
(00:00)
wrong
based on 0
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Ms. Rose argued that time & money invested in acquiring a professional degree are totally wasted.As evidence supporting her argument, she offered the case of a manwho at considerable expense of time and money, completed his law degree & then married & lived as a house-husband,taking care of the children & working part-time at a day-care center so that his wife could pursue her career.
The logical reasoning in Ms. Rose' argument is closely parallel to which of the following:
A)A juvenile delinquent who insists that his behaviour is attributable to the fact that his parents didn't love him.
B)A conscientous objector who bases his draft resistance on the premise that there can be no moral wars.
C)A senator who votes large sums of money for military equipment,but who votes against programs designed to help the poor.
D) When a policeman is found guilty of murdering his wife,an opponent of police brutality who says "Thats what these people mean by law and order"
E) A high school senator who decides that rather than go to college he'll enroll in a vocational program to learn to be an electrician.
The logical reasoning in Ms. Rose' argument is closely parallel to which of the following:
A)A juvenile delinquent who insists that his behaviour is attributable to the fact that his parents didn't love him.
B)A conscientous objector who bases his draft resistance on the premise that there can be no moral wars.
C)A senator who votes large sums of money for military equipment,but who votes against programs designed to help the poor.
D) When a policeman is found guilty of murdering his wife,an opponent of police brutality who says "Thats what these people mean by law and order"
E) A high school senator who decides that rather than go to college he'll enroll in a vocational program to learn to be an electrician.
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 below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
02 Nov 2004, 00:55
Kudos
Bookmarks
Wow, wherever you got this from. Interesting one - but I am fairly clueless. Let me embarass myself with some crude logic here..
Stimulus says 'Invests in X, but does Y, wasting X'. I am rewriting it slightly to read it as 'lawyer to house hubby, wasted lawyer'
Looking for a similar logic. D says 'Policeman to criminal, wasted Policeman'.
Stimulus says 'Invests in X, but does Y, wasting X'. I am rewriting it slightly to read it as 'lawyer to house hubby, wasted lawyer'
Looking for a similar logic. D says 'Policeman to criminal, wasted Policeman'.
02 Nov 2004, 14:44
Kudos
Bookmarks
I too think that the answer is D.
My reasoning:
A statement or a conclusion is based on observing just one example.
*Time an money is wasted on prof education bcoz the man became a house husband.
*One policmen killing his wife makes one conclude that this is what law and order means.
Nice question!
My reasoning:
A statement or a conclusion is based on observing just one example.
*Time an money is wasted on prof education bcoz the man became a house husband.
*One policmen killing his wife makes one conclude that this is what law and order means.
Nice question!
