GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video
close
It is currently 27 Feb 2021, 02:36
Register
GMAT Club Tests
Decision Tracker
My Rewards
New posts
New comers' posts

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
Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and passengers to we
27 posts Go to First Unread Post
Print view
NEW TOPIC
POST REPLY
Downloads
My Bookmarks
Reviews
SORT BY:
Date
Kudos
   1   2 
Tags:
Find Similar Topics 

Show Tags
Hide Tags

avatar
B
mathislife
Intern
Intern
Joined: 28 Jan 2019
Posts: 38
GMAT 1: 730 Q47 V42
Re: Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and passengers to we [#permalink] New post  09 Nov 2019, 10:54
1
Bookmarks
Opponents: I don’t want to be told to wear a seatbelt. I should be able to take that risk as long as I don't harm other people.
Conclusion: Up to individuals to choose whether to wear a seatbelt.


What would weaken the conclusion? We need to show that not wearing a seatbelt actually causes harm to others.

A) irrelevant
B) Possible. Rates going up for everyone is a form of “harm” based on the actions of others.
C) irrelevant
D) The rate of fatalities may be higher, but maybe it’s always the people without the seatbelt who are dying. In this case, there is no additional ‘harm’ to others
E) This is expected, but does not say anything about the harm to others.

Best answer seems to be B.
avatar
P
Harsh2111s
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 08 May 2019
Posts: 376
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
Schools: IIM (D), S.P.Jain Institute (A), XLRI, IIM, NUS
GPA: 4
WE:Manufacturing and Production (Manufacturing)
Reviews Badge
Re: Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and passengers to we [#permalink] New post  01 May 2020, 06:50
GMATNinja or any experts,

I am unable to connect the options to argument.Can someone explain each option through POE ?

I read all posts above but didn't find satisfactory answers.
avatar
B
saby1410
Manager
Manager
Joined: 06 Feb 2017
Posts: 141
Re: Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and passengers to we [#permalink] New post  13 Aug 2020, 08:00
VeritasKarishma GMATNinja

please explain the question
avatar
P
Harsh2111s
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 08 May 2019
Posts: 376
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Marketing
Schools: IIM (D), S.P.Jain Institute (A), XLRI, IIM, NUS
GPA: 4
WE:Manufacturing and Production (Manufacturing)
Reviews Badge
Re: Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and passengers to we [#permalink] New post  17 Aug 2020, 09:22
sshwetima wrote:
Experts please explain why A is not right ? Presenting my understanding:

Premise - People (opposing the law) argue that they have right to take risk if they don't harm others
Conclusion - Based on premise, they conclude that it's should be each person's decision whether or not to wear a seat belt

Goal - To weaken the conclusion which means that person cannot decide whether or not to wear a seat belt.

How to weaken the conclusion:
1. Any option which suggests that the person is not deciding about seat belt.
2. One person's decision harming others.

Quote:
(A) Many new cars are built with seat belts that automatically fasten when someone sits in the front seat.

Someone who sits in the front seat is forced to wear seat belt. Here person cannot decide on his own.

Thanks in advance!

Hi sshwetima,

Option A is specifically talking about "cars" while the arguments is about automobiles.
For cars yours argument is correct, but what about trucks,jeeps,buses etc.
Further for cars also it is too specific "automatically fasten when someone sits in the front seat".
Ok what about back seat ?

Option B here is much better weakener.
Hope this helps :)
avatar
B
sshwetima
Intern
Intern
Joined: 02 Aug 2019
Posts: 8
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Strategy
WE:Manufacturing and Production (Manufacturing)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and passengers to we [#permalink] New post  17 Aug 2020, 09:47
Thanks Harsh2111s

Agree with you but I've one more doubt now. The conclusion comments about each person so even if at least one person is forced to wear seat belt, won't it get weaken? Other question that I have is what should be opposite of "each" ?
avatar
B
MS1014
Intern
Intern
Joined: 29 Apr 2019
Posts: 9
Re: Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and passengers to we [#permalink] New post  17 Aug 2020, 21:34
ExecMBA2010 wrote:
manojgmat wrote:

D. The rate of automobile fatalities in states that do not have mandatory seat belt laws is greater than the rate of fatalities in states that do have such laws.
Show Spoiler
oa-b


Pl can someone explain why D cannot be correct ans. D indicates that rate of fatalities are higher in state where people are not mandated to wear seat belts. Does it not mean such fatalities involve others hence harm others. With this answer, of course, there is an underlying assumption that people of the state where law is not mandated, really do not wear the seat belts. This assumption maybe wrong and people may wear seat belts even w/out mandate, but such inference is too long drawn, isn't it?

Comments welcome.

Actually, I went for D but with inhibition, the inhibition was,
First, the solution should be on the lines of "How does one's not wearing seat belt affect others ?"
D is little ambiguous the fatalities have increased? whose? The one wearing seat-belts as well?

Thinking on the same line my not wearing a seat belt is actually affecting car owners, their premium for insurance is rising and B feels naturally correct.
avatar
S
CEdward
VP
VP
Joined: 11 Aug 2020
Posts: 1124
CAT Tests
Re: Opponents of laws that require automobile drivers and passengers to we [#permalink] New post  14 Feb 2021, 10:50
Hi all,

I can see the thinking behind each of the choices after reviewing the responses, but choice B seems to attack the premise that 'people in a free society have the right to take risks as long as people do not harm others as a result of taking the risks'. Is attacking the premise allowed on the GMAT?

ScottTargetTestPrep can you chime in?
_________________
"Do not pray for an easy life, pray for the strength to endure a difficult one." - Bruce Lee
Signature Read More
GMAT Club Bot
gmatclubot
[#permalink]
NEW TOPIC
POST REPLY
Downloads
My Bookmarks
Reviews
   1   2 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
4247 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
269 posts
mira93
CR Forum Moderator
126 posts
nightblade354
CR & LSAT Forum Moderator
1040 posts
carouselambra
CR Forum Moderator
441 posts
Feedback

cron

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

Main navigation

GMAT Resources

Partners

MBA Resources

www.gmac.com|www.mba.com | | GMAT Club Rules | Terms and Conditions