Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack
GMAT Club

 It is currently 23 Mar 2017, 03:51

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Paulsville and Longtown cannot both be included in the

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5061
Location: Singapore
Followers: 31

Kudos [?]: 370 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

06 Mar 2005, 22:12
A: Are you God?
B: No. Most of the times I don't make rules; I just follow rules.

God --> make rules most of the time
Don't make rules most of the time --> Not god

or
God --> most of the time do not follow rules
Most of the time follow rules --> not god

(A) God exists. --> Can't tell.
(B) Nobody can be God. --> Not implied
(C) God makes rules all the time. --> Not all the time, but most of the time
(D) God doesn't follow rules sometime. --> Yes, most of the time he doesn't follow rules, but sometimes he does
(E) If I make rules all the time I will be God. --> Again, not all the time, but most times.

D for me.
SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2243
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 333 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2005, 09:39
ywilfred wrote:
(D) God doesn't follow rules sometime. --> Yes, most of the time he doesn't follow rules, but sometimes he does

If D is the assumption:
God doesn't follow rules sometimes, and he does follow rules in other times.
B follows rules most of the times. Can this lead to the conclusion that B is not god? No. Because it is possible that B is god and he doesn't follow rules sometimes, but he follows rules most of the times. Only when B always follows rules all the times can we know that B is not god.

We have to be careful about sometimes, always, and never.

For example:

Birds sing sometimes. A never sings. Therefore A is not a bird.
Birds don't sing sometimes. A always sings. Therefore A is not a bird.

Compare to:

Birds always sing. A doesn't sing sometimes. Therefore A is not a bird.
Birds never sing. A sings sometimes. Therefore A is not a bird.

Compare to:
Birds sing sometimes. A sings sometimes. Is A a bird? We don't know. A may be a person who sings sometimes.
Birds sing sometimes. A doesn't sing sometimes. Is A not a bird? We don't know. A maybe a bird who sings sometimes and doesn't sing the other times.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5061
Location: Singapore
Followers: 31

Kudos [?]: 370 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2005, 09:58
(A) God exists
(B) Nobody can be God
(C) God makes rules all the time.
(D) God doesn't follow rules sometime.
(E) If I make rules all the time I will be God.

But by saying all the time, don't we mean 100% of the time, and most of the time could be 80%-99% of the time ?
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5061
Location: Singapore
Followers: 31

Kudos [?]: 370 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2005, 09:59
But I do know what you were explaning when you said: 'Only when B always follows rules all the times can we know that B is not god. '
SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2243
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 333 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2005, 10:04
ywilfred wrote:
But by saying all the time, don't we mean 100% of the time, and most of the time could be 80%-99% of the time ?

I can't give you a number for most of the time (perhaps 75% for me) but even if we use your number this fact could still be consistent with the possibility that B is god: God doesn't follow rules sometimes, B follow rules 80% of the time, but he doesn't follow rules some other times, so he can still be God.
SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2243
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 333 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2005, 10:05
ywilfred wrote:
But I do know what you were explaning when you said: 'Only when B always follows rules all the times can we know that B is not god. '

If D says God never follow rules, then it would be a correct assumption. Since from this and the fact that B follows rules most of the time/sometimes, we can conclude that B is not God.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5061
Location: Singapore
Followers: 31

Kudos [?]: 370 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2005, 10:12
How is E different from C then. E says I makes rules all the time, so I am God. This is the same as God make rules all the time, doesn't it ?
SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2243
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 333 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2005, 10:21
No. "I makes rules all the time, so I am God" means "If I make rules all the time, then I'm God". "God make rules all the time" means "If I am God, then I make rules all the time." One is if A then B, the other is if B then A. We know that these two are not equivalent at all.

God may make rules all the times, but other people may also make rules all the times too. You know, a legislator for example.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5061
Location: Singapore
Followers: 31

Kudos [?]: 370 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2005, 10:25
I just read the sticky on all the times/sometimes..so here goes:

Not God --> don't make rules most of the times
God --> Make rules most of the time

Not God --> Follow rules most times
God --> Do not follow rules most times

So if we have
x = god; then !x=not god
y=make rules, !y= don't make rules
z= follow fules, !z= don't follow rules

If !x -> !y (same as y->x)
If !x -> z (same as !z->x)

(C) has x->y (original statement provided for in the argument)
(D) has x->!z (not provided for, we only know !z->x, not the other way round)
(E) I -> y, so I->x (can't tell)

Here, i do not call the 'most of the time' or 'all the time' into the question.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5061
Location: Singapore
Followers: 31

Kudos [?]: 370 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2005, 10:26
thanks honghu, for your patience. I'm a little slow with these sort of logic CRs.
SVP
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 2243
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 333 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

07 Mar 2005, 10:49
No problem. Most of the times this is confusing to me as well.
07 Mar 2005, 10:49

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 31 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
11 A reason Larson cannot do the assignmen 13 27 Feb 2014, 03:05
Psychologist: The obligation to express gratitude cannot be 11 17 Feb 2012, 15:14
The usefulness of lie detectors cannot be overestimated. 5 17 Jun 2009, 23:30
Pausville and Longtown cannot both be included in the 7 27 Sep 2007, 18:27
The usefulness of lie detectors cannot be overestimated. 8 12 Sep 2007, 23:11
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Paulsville and Longtown cannot both be included in the

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.