Only senior citizens enjoy doing the daily jumble. So Aesha must

Can someone please explain this question in a little detail? How to relate the two situations ? Also Why is option C wrong?

Experts please explain why is option C wrong? And how to go about solving such analogy questions?

this is a mix question. "flaw" here indicates that this is not only logic-error question, but also an application questions.
Only A do B = every B is A
the flaw is not B -> not A

Practice is the best way to cope with different gmat questions.

Flaw is senior citizen - > enjoy jumble doesn't imply ~not citizen-> ~ No jumble enjoyment. (flawed contrapositive) Replicated by B.

Sent from my ONE A2003 using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

can someone tell me how to do these kind of questions

My 2 cents:

VERITAS PREP OFFICIAL SOLUTION:

Solution: B

This Mimic the Reasoning question features difficult conditional wording. “Only x does y” can be reworded as “If you do y, then you are x”, a change of phrase that makes the question much easier to solve. “If you enjoy the jumble, you’re a senior citizen” implies two things: 1) if you enjoy the jumble, you’re a senior citizen, and 2) if you aren’t a senior citizen, you don’t enjoy the jumble. It does NOT imply that if you don’t enjoy the jumble, you’re not a senior citizen, so find an answer choice that also employs such faulty logic. (B) is the answer of choice.

Only senior citizens enjoy doing the daily jumble. So Aesha must not be a senior citizen, because she does not enjoy doing the daily jumble.

Which of the following arguments exhibits the same flawed reasoning as the above?

A. Only in March does Rodrigo choose to holiday in Spain. It is March, but Rodrigo is in Japan. So he must not be going to Spain. [Incorrect as different comparison]

B. Only a true pet lover could adopt Marley. Thus, since Michael is not adopting Marley, he must not be a true pet lover. [Correct, same comparison]

C. Only geologists enjoy the amethyst exhibit at the town fair. So Mr. Franz must not enjoy the amethyst exhibit, because he is not a geologist. [Incorrect as different comparison]

D. Since the animal in front of us is a penguin, it follows that we are in Antarctica, since one only encounters penguins in the wild when one is in Antarctica. [Incorrect as different comparison]

E. Only the best chefs can make compelling vegan escargot. So Rasheed must be able to make compelling vegan escargot, since he is one of the world’s best chefs. [Incorrect as different comparison]

According to the passage:
1. Only senior citizens enjoy doing the daily jumble.
2. As Aesha doesn't enjoy doing the daily jumble --> she must not be a senior citizen.
Flaw: she could be a senior citizen, but she doesn't enjoy doing the jumbles

option B:
1. Only a true pet lover could adopt Marley.
2. As Michael is not adopting Marley --> he must not be a true pet lover.
Flaw: He could be a true pet lover, but he's still not interested in adopting Marley

all the reasonings are not helpful at all. Why is C wrong and what is the difference between B and C. Can someone please explain in a simple and a better way.
Dissatisfied.

Given:
1. Only Senior citizens enjoy doing jumble.
2. Aaesha is not Senior citizen because she doesn't enjoy jumbles.
Now consider Senior citizens as superset.
People who enjoy doing jumble is a subset of Senior citizen set.
There may be other senior citizens too, who do not enjoy playing jumble.
So, the conclusion is wrong in assuming Senior citizen set and people who play jumble set are the same.

Now the option B:
1. Only true pet lover could adopt Marley.
2. Michel is not true pet lover since he did not adopt Marley.
Again, the same reasoning. Michel could have adopted a different pet. He may be the part of bigger pet lover set, but not the smaller Marley set. Concluding based on only 'Marley' condition that Michel is not a pet lover is wrong. Keep B.

Option C:
Larger set: Geologists
Subset of Geologists: Geologists who enjoy amethyst exhibition. (Note that only Geologists enjoy the exhibition,no others)
Based on the premise, C says Franz must not enjoy amethyst exhibition since he's not a Geologist.
In other words, since Franz is not even part of bigger set so there is no chance that he enjoys Amethyst exhibition.
Option C logically follows the conclusion.

Had it been something like, Franz is not a Geologist because he does not enjoy Amethyst exhibition, then it follows the flawed logic.

Let me know whether this helps.

Posted from my mobile device

Hello VeritasKarishma,

Could you help me in choosing between B & C?
I'm confused.

Thanks

Check this post first:
https://www.gmatclub.com/forum/veritas-prep-resource-links-no-longer-available-399979.html#/2012/1 ... tatements/

Only senior citizens enjoy doing the daily jumble.
Aesha does not enjoy doing the daily jumble.

Conclusion: So Aesha must not be a senior citizen.

We are given an only if condition: only if senior citizen -> then enjoy jumble
Only if A, then B.

The conclusion says: "Not B implies not A"
We know this is faulty. This is not implied. Let's look for another argument that makes the same error.

A. Only in March does Rodrigo choose to holiday in Spain. It is March, but Rodrigo is in Japan. So he must not be going to Spain.

A - March
B - Holiday in Spain.

To make the same error, the argument needs to say "Not B implies not A" i.e. since Rodrigo is not vacationing in Spain, it is not March.
The argument doesn't say that. Incorrect.


B. Only a true pet lover could adopt Marley. Thus, since Michael is not adopting Marley, he must not be a true pet lover.

A - true pet lover
B - adopt Marley

To make the same error, the argument needs to say "Not B implies not A" i.e. since Michael is not adopting Marley, he is not a true pet lover.
This is exactly what the argument says. Correct.

C. Only geologists enjoy the amethyst exhibit at the town fair. So Mr. Franz must not enjoy the amethyst exhibit, because he is not a geologist.

A - Geologists
B - enjoy amethyst exhibit

To make the same error, the argument needs to say "Not B implies not A" i.e. since Mr Franz doesn't enjoy the amethyst exhibit, so he is not a geologist.
Does the argument say that? No.

The argument says that since he is not a geologist, he must not enjoy the amethyst exhibit. It says "Not A implies Not B". That is implied from the conditional statement. This argument is not flawed.

But our original argument is flawed and we need one which is flawed in the same way.


Note: Be careful of what you are given and what is concluded.

In structures such as:
- Since/because A happens, so/thus/hence B happens.
- So B happens, because A happens.

Here, A is given and you are concluding B.

It doesn't matter what is written first. Focus on the keywords. "Since/because" give you premises. "So/thus/hence" give you conclusions.

Answer (B)

I have not found a useful explanation to this so posting one here:

Structure: Only A Does X, B is not A(Prediction) Since B doesn’t do X


1)Only in March does Rodrigo choose to holiday in Spain. It is March, but Rodrigo is in Japan. So he must not be going to Spain. Where is B?

2)Only a true pet lover(A) could adopt Marley(X). Thus, since Michael(B) is not adopting Marley(X), he must not be a true pet lover. Only A  Could do X ; Since B is not doing X; hence B is not A(Prediction)

3)Only geologists(A) enjoy the amethyst exhibit at the town fair(X). So Mr. Franz(B) must not enjoy the amethyst exhibit(X), because he is not a geologist(A).
Only A enjoy X ; B must not Enjoy X (Prediction) because B is not A

4)Since the animal in front of us is a penguin, it follows that we are in Antarctica, since one only encounters penguins in the wild when one is in Antarctica.

5)Only the best chefs(A) can make compelling vegan escargot(X). So Rasheed(B) must be able to make compelling vegan escargot(X), since he is one of the world’s best chefs (A).
Only A- do X ; B must do X (Prediction)

Therefore Only 2 matches the stimulus structure.

Dear Experts, Kindly suggest how to solve such questions. I chose C because that was similarly worded. But i got wrong. Please help

Hello, tenben. I see at least two Expert replies above. I hope that you would have looked them over before calling in another Expert. You said that answer choice (C) "was similarly worded" to the passage. I feel the need to point out that close enough is not good enough on the GMAT™. Still, in the interest of showing you just how (C) does not work, I will add a little color to the prompt and test each answer choice in the same way.

First off, notice the structure: only + noun + verb + object; conclusion (not noun because not verb + object). We want to find an answer choice that closely fits this chain of logic. Or, if you prefer,

A + B; B → A

The latter half is all mixed up. To parallel the original argument, we would expect something along the lines of the following:

So it must not be March, because [Rodrigo/he] is not choosing to holiday in Spain.

Granted, the conclusion structure is inverted from the original—here, we get the premise first, then the conclusion—but the pieces fit. It is the logical components that need to match, not necessarily their order.

The conclusion should be that Mr. Franz must not be a geologist, based on the fact that he does not enjoy the amethyst exhibit at the town fair. So is a conclusion marker and because a premise marker. This answer choice has the two parts in the wrong place at the end, so it does not parallel the original argument.

This does not even remotely parallel the given argument, and there are no negations to be seen. I would not even bother trying to fix it.

The beginning starts off well enough, but in the latter portion, we expect to see a conclusion based on a negation of the premise:

Only the best chefs can make compelling vegan escargot. So Rasheed must not be one of the best chefs, since he cannot make compelling vegan escargot.

Perhaps this all makes more sense now. Although there are not too many Similar Reasoning questions in the official (GMAT™) question bank compared to other question types, it can still be worthwhile to understand the logical underpinnings of the passage, a vital skill for success in CR.

Good luck with your studies.

- Andrew

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.