It is currently 17 Oct 2017, 17:02

### 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

# Philosopher: The eighteenth-century thesis that motion is

Author Message
Director
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 584

Kudos [?]: 279 [0], given: 0

Philosopher: The eighteenth-century thesis that motion is [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2005, 13:06
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

25. Philosopher: The eighteenth-century thesis that motion is absolute asserts that the change in an objectâ€™s position over time could be measured without reference to the position of any other object. A well-respected physicist, however, claims that this thesis is incoherent. Since a thesis that is incoherent cannot be accepted as a description of reality, motion cannot be absolute.

The argument uses which one of the following argumentative techniques?

(A) attempting to persuade by the mere use of technical terminology
(B) using experimental results to justify a change in definition
(C) relying on the authority of an expert to support a premise
(D) inferring from what has been observed to be the case under experimental conditions to what is in principle true
(E) generalizing from what is true in one region of space to what must be true in all regions of space

Kudos [?]: 279 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 23 May 2005
Posts: 32

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: motion is absolute [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2005, 14:08
WinWinMBA wrote:
25. Philosopher: The eighteenth-century thesis that motion is absolute asserts that the change in an objectâ€™s position over time could be measured without reference to the position of any other object. A well-respected physicist, however, claims that this thesis is incoherent. Since a thesis that is incoherent cannot be accepted as a description of reality, motion cannot be absolute.

The argument uses which one of the following argumentative techniques?

(A) attempting to persuade by the mere use of technical terminology
(B) using experimental results to justify a change in definition
(C) relying on the authority of an expert to support a premise
(D) inferring from what has been observed to be the case under experimental conditions to what is in principle true
(E) generalizing from what is true in one region of space to what must be true in all regions of space

I am going with A.

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 28 Sep 2004
Posts: 81

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 0

Location: New York City
Re: CR: motion is absolute [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2005, 14:19
C ?

Kudos [?]: 12 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 27 Dec 2004
Posts: 896

Kudos [?]: 53 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: motion is absolute [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2005, 16:35
michalky wrote:
C ?

It doesn't seem as the passage is supporting any premise.

Anyway, I pick B

Kudos [?]: 53 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 1798

Kudos [?]: 170 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2005, 18:42
I will go with C.

Kudos [?]: 170 [0], given: 0

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5036

Kudos [?]: 436 [0], given: 0

Location: Singapore

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2005, 19:01
I'll go with C. In the passage, we're told the Physicist dimisses the theory as incoherent, and therefore the principle of motion cannot be absolute. However, we're nto told why the Physicists dismissed the theory as incoherent. So the argumentative is one that is relying simply on autority of an exeprt.

Kudos [?]: 436 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 21 Apr 2005
Posts: 163

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

Location: Atlanta , GA

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2005, 19:08
I am kind of between A and C ..
but I choose "C"..

What is OA ??

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 0

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 07 Jul 2004
Posts: 5036

Kudos [?]: 436 [0], given: 0

Location: Singapore

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2005, 19:12
shalinikhatri wrote:
I am kind of between A and C ..
but I choose "C"..

What is OA ??

(A) attempting to persuade by the mere use of technical terminology
A cannot be right because it says to persuade by use of technical terminology. In the passage, the physicist did not persuade for his case, he simply dismissed the theory as incoherent. The fact that he mentioned that incoherent means not absolute is not important since is simply to state that motion is not absolute. He has not shown case as to why he thinks the theory is incoherent in the first place.

Kudos [?]: 436 [0], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 1708

Kudos [?]: 94 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: motion is absolute [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2005, 20:13
Quote:
Philosopher: A well-respected physicist, however, claims that this thesis is incoherent. Since a thesis that is incoherent cannot be accepted as a description of reality, motion cannot be absolute.

Quote:
The argument uses which one of the following argumentative techniques?

Quote:
(C) relying on the authority of an expert to support a premise

the author is just refering the physicist's statement. so it should be C.

Kudos [?]: 94 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 09 Jun 2005
Posts: 135

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

14 Jun 2005, 22:56
C sounds good to me

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 17 May 2005
Posts: 270

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 0

Location: Auckland, New Zealand
Re: CR: motion is absolute [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Jun 2005, 00:34
A...doesn't sound great but leaving it for now.
B is not true as there are no experimental results talked about
C....could be true...but it says relying on the authority of an expert to support a premise...but no premise was made that was supported...rather a statement was made followed by the author's opinion which counters the statement, and a conclusion was drawn that the original statement is false...thus eliminating C
D...no experimental conditions
E...irrelevant

Thus though i dont like A...since nothing is left i pick A

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 23 May 2005
Posts: 32

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

15 Jun 2005, 02:47
I am still sticking with A and here is my explanation why:

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 23 May 2005
Posts: 32

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

15 Jun 2005, 02:48
I apologize for my previous incomplete thread:

I am still sticking with A and here is my explanation why -

in A the author makes a conclusion that the thesis is incoherent. However, the premise of his conclusion is the conclusion itself. Which is absurd. Now, the sentence - Since a thesis that is incoherent cannot be accepted as a description of reality, motion cannot be absolute. is just to confuse people, but not to give a valid explanation.

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Director
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 584

Kudos [?]: 279 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

15 Jun 2005, 16:12
The OA is C.

Kudos [?]: 279 [0], given: 0

Display posts from previous: Sort by