When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf and are then aske

Hello MulanQ

I understand the question's logic is quite hard to digest. The key point is that the deaf part is dissociated from the replies part. It means that no matter one can/can't hear anything, he/she always replies in a predetermined way. In this question, the deaf part means one is hypnotized to become "deaf", he/she is not a deaf person. (I think you misunderstood this point). In order to prove that the two parts is dissociated, we have to prove TWO cases, NOT only one used by the author.

If the deaf part is dissociated from the replies part, so:

Case #1: Although one can actually hear, he/she always replies "NO". --> It means the the "deaf" (or the hearing part) does not affect the reply part. (If he/she says "YES", he/she may hear something actually --> the deaf part may not dissociated from the reply part).

Case #2: Although one does NOT hear anything, he/she still replies "YES" --> It means the the "deaf" (or the hearing part) does not affect the reply part. (If he/she says "NO", he/she may not hear anything actually --> the deaf part may not dissociated from the reply part).

If the two cases above are shown properly, the argument's conclusion is correct. But if only one case is shown, case #1 in this question, we can't conclude that the deaf part is dissociated from the replies part.

A shows that the author "forgot" case #2, so the conclusion should be weaken.

Hope it helps.

When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf and are then asked whether they can hear the hypnotist, they reply, "No." Some theorists try to explain this result by arguing that the selves of hypnotized subjects are dissociated into separate parts, and that the part that is deaf is dissociated from the part that replies.

Which of the following challenges indicates the most serious weakness in the attempted explanation described above?

(A) Why does the part that replies not answer, "Yes"?

(B) Why are the observed facts in need of any special explanation?

(C) Why do the subjects appear to accept the hypnotist's suggestion that they are deaf?

(D) Why do hypnotized subjects all respond the same way in the situation described?

(E) Why are the separate parts of the self the same for all subjects?

Hi, can u kindly help me to understand how option A is different from option D. A asks why do the subjects dont respond 'yes'. D, on the other hand, asks why do the subjects respond in the same manner ie. they say no every time instead of yes.

Indeed I got it right. However I am still not satisfied with Choice A. What guarantees that a Yes or No to this question will make theorists' argument wrong that selves of hypnotized subjects get dissociated into separate parts?

Just restarted my GMAT life. KUDOs please

is this a easy medium or hard question on the gmat?

I do not understand this question at all. Why is the concern not about what is stated in D or E? If the two parts are dissociated then how does everyone have the same response and also how ar everybody's parts the same? This does weaken the conclusion

What would the passage or wording have to be in order for D or E to work?

This is the proposed explanation for the surprising phenomenon:
the selves of hypnotized subjects are dissociated into separate parts.
If that explanation is indeed the correct explanation, Elite097, wouldn't you expect all subjects to be impacted in the same way? In fact, I'd find it surprising if there was a variation in the ways in which the subjects were impacted.

(D) would be a good answer if we add the word "some" to the explanation:
the selves of SOME hypnotized subjects are dissociated into separate parts, and that the part that is deaf is dissociated from the part that replies.
(E) would be a good answer if the hypnotized subjects were all told different things (some were told that they're blind, some were told that they're deaf, etc.

To me it seems that if deafness and what they say are dissociated, the responses would be more randomized and people would be more likely to give random responses: some yes and some no since there is no logic behind them saying 'no'. It is not that we are told anywhere that they say 'no' on behalf of the deaf part

That's why the correct answer is (A). If the selves are truly dissociated, you'd expect the part that replies to always reply "Yes".
I don't know why you'd expect the responses to be randomized, Elite097.

Yeah because what is the reason for them to always say 'no'? There is no reason to it. It is purely random and without a logic- not related to deaf part or anything they perceive.

the selves of hypnotized subjects are dissociated into separate parts

the part that is deaf is dissociated from the part that replies.