It is currently 21 Nov 2017, 19:12

### 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

# Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences, appears to

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Director
Affiliations: SAE
Joined: 11 Jul 2012
Posts: 519

Kudos [?]: 339 [3], given: 269

Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Social Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V37
GPA: 3.5
WE: Project Management (Energy and Utilities)
Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences, appears to [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2012, 00:42
3
KUDOS
10
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

58% (01:26) correct 42% (01:37) wrong based on 686 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences, appears to have been possible by reducing phenomena to mathematical expressions. Some social scientists also want the power to predict accurately and assume they ought to perform the same reduction. But this would be a mistake; it would neglect data that are not easily mathematized and thereby would only distort the social phenomena.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the argument?

(A) The social sciences do not have as much predictive power as the natural sciences.
(B) Mathematics plays a more important role in the natural sciences than it does in the social sciences.
(C) There is a need in the social sciences to improve the ability to predict.
(D) Phenomena in the social sciences should not be reduced to mathematical formulas.
(E) Prediction is responsible for the success of the natural sciences.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

First Attempt 710 - http://gmatclub.com/forum/first-attempt-141273.html

Kudos [?]: 339 [3], given: 269

MBA Section Director
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 4688

Kudos [?]: 17663 [2], given: 1986

Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)
Re: Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2012, 01:38
2
KUDOS
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences, appears to have been possible by reducing phenomena to mathematical expressions. Some social scientists also want the power to predict accurately and assume they ought to perform the same reduction. But this would be a mistake; it would neglect data that are not easily mathematized and thereby would only distort the social phenomena.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the argument?

(A) The social sciences do not have as much predictive power as the natural sciences. We dont know but may be psychology improves prediction power of social sciences into something better than that of natural sciences. SO cannot assume.
(B) Mathematics plays a more important role in the natural sciences than it does in the social sciences.This might sound correct. But mathematics do not play any role in the fields themselves, but rather helps in prediction in those fields. Incorrect
(C) There is a need in the social sciences to improve the ability to predict.This is wrong by the same logic that I wrote in 1
(D) Phenomena in the social sciences should not be reduced to mathematical formulas.This is correct as social sciences contain data that is not easily mathematized
(E) Prediction is responsible for the success of the natural sciences.We dont know whether natural sciences are successful. All we know is that prediction is possible there
_________________

Kudos [?]: 17663 [2], given: 1986

Manager
Joined: 02 May 2012
Posts: 108

Kudos [?]: 75 [2], given: 34

Location: United Kingdom
WE: Account Management (Other)
Re: Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2012, 02:18
2
KUDOS
Rather than go through a POE, I think there is an easier method by looking at the question:

Which of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion? – Meaning: Locate the main conclusion in the argument and match to one of A-E.

So lets find the conclusion:
Prediction, the hallmark..... a premise describing what prediction is (therefore very much factual)
Some social scientist...... further information on the preferences of social scientists. Another premise.
But this would be a mistake..... Bingo! This statement talks about what would happen in the hypothetical future if the aforementioned premises were followed. I like these kind of conclusions (ones which talk about what might happen in the future) because they are easily located by the mere fact they occur in a different ‘tense’ in the argument.

All you need to do now is read A – E and see which matches this conclusion. There is only one thats close: D

Hope that helps

B.
_________________

In the study cave!

Kudos [?]: 75 [2], given: 34

MBA Section Director
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 4688

Kudos [?]: 17663 [0], given: 1986

Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)
Re: Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2012, 02:22
Yeah that is whats the best option for conclusion/inference questions. However, I think its good to show how exactly the wrong answer choices are wrong so that you have a feeling of how gmat throws you off guard.
_________________

Kudos [?]: 17663 [0], given: 1986

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10127

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

Re: Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences, appears to [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Oct 2013, 11:19
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Kudos [?]: 270 [0], given: 0

Current Student
Joined: 03 Feb 2013
Posts: 941

Kudos [?]: 1077 [0], given: 548

Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Strategy
GMAT 1: 760 Q49 V44
GPA: 3.88
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Re: Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Dec 2013, 11:18
souvik101990 wrote:
Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences, appears to have been possible by reducing phenomena to mathematical expressions. Some social scientists also want the power to predict accurately and assume they ought to perform the same reduction. But this would be a mistake; it would neglect data that are not easily mathematized and thereby would only distort the social phenomena.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the argument?

(A) The social sciences do not have as much predictive power as the natural sciences. We dont know but may be psychology improves prediction power of social sciences into something better than that of natural sciences. SO cannot assume.
(B) Mathematics plays a more important role in the natural sciences than it does in the social sciences.This might sound correct. But mathematics do not play any role in the fields themselves, but rather helps in prediction in those fields. Incorrect
(C) There is a need in the social sciences to improve the ability to predict.This is wrong by the same logic that I wrote in 1
(D) Phenomena in the social sciences should not be reduced to mathematical formulas.This is correct as social sciences contain data that is not easily mathematized
(E) Prediction is responsible for the success of the natural sciences.We dont know whether natural sciences are successful. All we know is that prediction is possible there

@Souvik : I have no problem with D if it states that "For prediction to be possible,phenomena in the social sciences should not be reduced to mathematical formulas. ", but don't you think the statement D may not be true in all the cases.
_________________

Thanks,
Kinjal

My Application Experience : http://gmatclub.com/forum/hardwork-never-gets-unrewarded-for-ever-189267-40.html#p1516961

Kudos [?]: 1077 [0], given: 548

Manager
Joined: 09 Apr 2013
Posts: 148

Kudos [?]: 122 [0], given: 24

Location: India
WE: Supply Chain Management (Consulting)
Re: Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences, appears to [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Dec 2013, 13:31
Between C and D, I chose C from the idea - Some social scientists also want the power to predict

I felt D is a bit extreme to conclude. Someone please explain why C is out.

Thanks.
_________________

+1 KUDOS is the best way to say thanks

"Pay attention to every detail"

Kudos [?]: 122 [0], given: 24

Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Nov 2012
Posts: 333

Kudos [?]: 430 [0], given: 4

Schools: LBS '14 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q48 V48
Re: Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences, appears to [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Dec 2013, 08:58
Hi CSSK,

to get this right, you really need to get what the meaning of 'conclusion' is. That is to say the result of what you are thinking at the end of the passage, with all info taken into account.

With C -it's not the CONCLUSION. It's more the starting point for the argument.

Hence why it is wrong

Hope that helps

James
_________________

Former GMAT Pill student, now on staff. Used GMATPILL OG 12 and nothing else: 770 (48,48) & 6.0

... and more

Kudos [?]: 430 [0], given: 4

Intern
Joined: 03 Jul 2013
Posts: 45

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 9

Re: Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences, appears to [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Mar 2014, 05:51
D for me

Psg conclusion: But this would be a mistake; it would neglect data that are not easily mathematized and thereby would only distort the social phenomena - saying don't do it, not the way to go.

D) Phenomena in the social sciences should not be reduced to mathematical formulas.

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 9

Director
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 591

Kudos [?]: 480 [0], given: 200

Location: Germany
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
GMAT 1: 580 Q46 V24
GPA: 3.88
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences, appears to [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Feb 2015, 11:06
Step 1: Find the Conclusion
Conclusion: But this would be a mistake; WHY ? BECAUSE --> it would neglect data that are not easily mathematized and thereby would only distort the social phenomena.

Step 2: Paraphrase the conlclusion
(D) Phenomena in the social sciences should not be reduced to mathematical formula = But this would be a mistake WHICH refers to --> social scientists also want the power to predict accurately and assume they ought to perform the same reduction
_________________

When you’re up, your friends know who you are. When you’re down, you know who your friends are.

800Score ONLY QUANT CAT1 51, CAT2 50, CAT3 50
GMAT PREP 670
MGMAT CAT 630
KAPLAN CAT 660

Kudos [?]: 480 [0], given: 200

Manager
Joined: 03 Jul 2015
Posts: 70

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 41

Concentration: Marketing, Finance
Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences, appears to [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 May 2016, 10:27
souvik101990 wrote:
Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences, appears to have been possible by reducing phenomena to mathematical expressions. Some social scientists also want the power to predict accurately and assume they ought to perform the same reduction. But this would be a mistake; it would neglect data that are not easily mathematized and thereby would only distort the social phenomena.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the argument?

(A) The social sciences do not have as much predictive power as the natural sciences. We dont know but may be psychology improves prediction power of social sciences into something better than that of natural sciences. SO cannot assume.
(B) Mathematics plays a more important role in the natural sciences than it does in the social sciences.This might sound correct. But mathematics do not play any role in the fields themselves, but rather helps in prediction in those fields. Incorrect
(C) There is a need in the social sciences to improve the ability to predict.This is wrong by the same logic that I wrote in 1
(D) Phenomena in the social sciences should not be reduced to mathematical formulas.This is correct as social sciences contain data that is not easily mathematized
(E) Prediction is responsible for the success of the natural sciences.We dont know whether natural sciences are successful. All we know is that prediction is possible there

Regarding D: But there can be some data that can be mathematized and some which cannot be. How can we generalize that every data cannot be mathematized?
And if some data can be mathematized then surely it can be reduced to mathematical formulas.

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 41

Manager
Joined: 12 Dec 2016
Posts: 93

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 43

Re: Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences, appears to [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Oct 2017, 22:41
kinjiGC wrote:
souvik101990 wrote:
Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences, appears to have been possible by reducing phenomena to mathematical expressions. Some social scientists also want the power to predict accurately and assume they ought to perform the same reduction. But this would be a mistake; it would neglect data that are not easily mathematized and thereby would only distort the social phenomena.
Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the argument?

(A) The social sciences do not have as much predictive power as the natural sciences. We dont know but may be psychology improves prediction power of social sciences into something better than that of natural sciences. SO cannot assume.
(B) Mathematics plays a more important role in the natural sciences than it does in the social sciences.This might sound correct. But mathematics do not play any role in the fields themselves, but rather helps in prediction in those fields. Incorrect
(C) There is a need in the social sciences to improve the ability to predict.This is wrong by the same logic that I wrote in 1
(D) Phenomena in the social sciences should not be reduced to mathematical formulas.This is correct as social sciences contain data that is not easily mathematized
(E) Prediction is responsible for the success of the natural sciences.We dont know whether natural sciences are successful. All we know is that prediction is possible there

Souvik : I have no problem with D if it states that "For prediction to be possible,phenomena in the social sciences should not be reduced to mathematical formulas. ", but don't you think the statement D may not be true in all the cases.

In identifying the conclusion of an argument, you go where the premises lead you even though they may not be factually correct in the real world. The conclusion is what the author concludes based on the premises he/she provided. It might be a weak conclusion, but in this question type, that's beside the point.
_________________

Give me kudos and see what happens to your GMAT score

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 43

Re: Prediction, the hallmark of natural sciences, appears to   [#permalink] 16 Oct 2017, 22:41
Display posts from previous: Sort by