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.
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
04 Mar 2017, 00:51
Kudos
Bookmarks
B
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
25%
(medium)
Question Stats:
74% (01:45) correct
26%
(02:13)
wrong
based on 559
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
People who have specialized knowledge about a scientific or technical issue are systematically excluded from juries for trials where the issue is relevant. Thus, trial by jury is not a fair means of settling disputes involving such issues.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
(A) The more complicated the issue being litigated, the less likely it is that a juror without specialized knowledge of the field involved will be able to comprehend the testimony being given.
(B) The more a juror knows about a particular scientific or technical issue involved in a trial, the more likely it is that the juror will be prejudiced in favor of one of the litigating parties before the trial begins.
(C) Appointing an impartial arbitrator is not a fair means of settling disputes involving scientific or technical issues, because arbitrators tend to favor settlements in which both parties compromise on the issues.
(D) Experts who give testimony on scientific or technical issues tend to hedge their conclusions by discussing the possibility of error.
(E) Expert witnesses in specialized fields often command fees that are so high that many people involved in litigation cannot afford their services.
Source : PowerScore
Source : LSAT PrepTest42 Q20
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
(A) The more complicated the issue being litigated, the less likely it is that a juror without specialized knowledge of the field involved will be able to comprehend the testimony being given.
(B) The more a juror knows about a particular scientific or technical issue involved in a trial, the more likely it is that the juror will be prejudiced in favor of one of the litigating parties before the trial begins.
(C) Appointing an impartial arbitrator is not a fair means of settling disputes involving scientific or technical issues, because arbitrators tend to favor settlements in which both parties compromise on the issues.
(D) Experts who give testimony on scientific or technical issues tend to hedge their conclusions by discussing the possibility of error.
(E) Expert witnesses in specialized fields often command fees that are so high that many people involved in litigation cannot afford their services.
Source : PowerScore
Source : LSAT PrepTest42 Q20
25 Apr 2021, 02:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
AR15J
OFFICIAL EXPLANATION
The first sentence is a premise, and the second sentence is the conclusion of this argument. To attack this conclusion, look for an answer choice that shows that the exclusion of knowledgeable individuals from scientific or technical issue trials is a fair way of proceeding in these trials.
Answer choice (A): This is an Opposite answer that strengthens the conclusion. If specialized knowledge of these issues makes it more likely that the juror can comprehend the testimony being given, then these individuals should not be excluded from juries, and their exclusion makes trial by jury an unfair means of resolving a dispute.
Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer. If the specialized knowledge is likely to produce a prejudice in a juror, then by all means they should be excluded from the jury. Thus, instead of trial by jury being an unfair means, it is made more fair by the exclusion of these individuals. The answer is a tricky one because most people initially think the answer agrees with the argument. It agrees with the principle of the premise, but not with the conclusion drawn from that premise.
Answer choice (C): This answer simply notes that arbitrators are not a fair means of settling scientific or technical issue debates. This has no impact on the fairness of jury trials involving these same issues.
Answer choice (D): This answer is about the experts testifying at scientific or technical issue trials. This information does not attack the claim that jury trials are unfair because of the exclusion of jurors with knowledge of these issues.
Answer choice (E): This answer can be eliminated by reasoning similar to that used to eliminate answer choice (D).
General Discussion
05 Mar 2017, 05:24
Kudos
Bookmarks
Question Type: Weaken
Specialized knowledge people --> Excluded --> Decision not fair
Assumption: Specialized knowledge people can make correct decisions
(A) The more complicated the issue being litigated, the less likely it is that a juror without specialized knowledge of the field involved will be able to comprehend the testimony being given. - Incorrect. Opposite.
(B) The more a juror knows about a particular scientific or technical issue involved in a trial, the more likely it is that the juror will be prejudiced in favor of one of the litigating parties before the trial begins. - Correct. This option conveys that the people with specialized knowledge will make biased decisions.
(C) Appointing an impartial arbitrator is not a fair means of settling disputes involving scientific or technical issues, because arbitrators tend to favor settlements in which both parties compromise on the issues. - Incorrect. Opposite.
(D) Experts who give testimony on scientific or technical issues tend to hedge their conclusions by discussing the possibility of error. - Incorrect. We do not know whether this will lead to a fair result or unfair result.
(E) Expert witnesses in specialized fields often command fees that are so high that many people involved in litigation cannot afford their services. - Incorrect. Out of scope.
Answer: B
Specialized knowledge people --> Excluded --> Decision not fair
Assumption: Specialized knowledge people can make correct decisions
(A) The more complicated the issue being litigated, the less likely it is that a juror without specialized knowledge of the field involved will be able to comprehend the testimony being given. - Incorrect. Opposite.
(B) The more a juror knows about a particular scientific or technical issue involved in a trial, the more likely it is that the juror will be prejudiced in favor of one of the litigating parties before the trial begins. - Correct. This option conveys that the people with specialized knowledge will make biased decisions.
(C) Appointing an impartial arbitrator is not a fair means of settling disputes involving scientific or technical issues, because arbitrators tend to favor settlements in which both parties compromise on the issues. - Incorrect. Opposite.
(D) Experts who give testimony on scientific or technical issues tend to hedge their conclusions by discussing the possibility of error. - Incorrect. We do not know whether this will lead to a fair result or unfair result.
(E) Expert witnesses in specialized fields often command fees that are so high that many people involved in litigation cannot afford their services. - Incorrect. Out of scope.
Answer: B
