Forum Home > GMAT > Quantitative > Problem Solving (PS)
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.
Dec 1511:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease.
Dec 1511:30 AM EST
-12:30 PM EST
Struggling to find the right strategies to score a 99 %ile on GMAT Focus? Riya (GMAT 715) boosted her score by 100-points in just 15 days! Discover how the right mentorship, tailored strategies, and an unwavering mindset can transform your GMAT prep.
Dec 1608:00 AM PST
-11:59 PM PST
GMAT Club 12 Days of Christmas is a 4th Annual GMAT Club Winter Competition based on solving questions. This is the Winter GMAT competition on GMAT Club with an amazing opportunity to win over $40,000 worth of prizes!- Dec 17
09:00 AM PST
-10:00 AM PST
Join Manhattan Prep instructor Whitney Garner for a fun—and thorough—review of logic-based (non-math) problems, with a particular emphasis on Data Sufficiency and Two-Parts. - Dec 18
10:00 AM PST
-11:00 AM PST
Here is the essential guide to securing scholarships as an MBA student! In this video, we explore the various types of scholarships available, including need-based and merit-based options. 
Dec 2008:00 PM PST
-09:00 PM PST
Full-length FE mock with insightful analytics, weakness diagnosis, and video explanations!
Updated on: 09 Oct 2018, 05:37
Originally posted by vaivish1723 on 22 Feb 2010, 10:51.
Last edited by Bunuel on 09 Oct 2018, 05:37, edited 2 times in total.
Last edited by Bunuel on 09 Oct 2018, 05:37, edited 2 times in total.
Renamed the topic and edited the question.
Kudos
Bookmarks
C
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
65%
(hard)
Question Stats:
63% (02:13) correct
37%
(02:32)
wrong
based on 919
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Professor Smith published a paper arguing that a chemical found in minute quantities in most drinking water had an adverse effect on the human nervous system. Existing scientific theory held that no such effect was possible because there was no neural mechanism for bringing it about. Several papers by well-known scientists in the field followed, unanimously purporting to prove Professor Smith wrong. This clearly shows that the scientific establishment was threatened by Professor Smith’s work and conspired to discredit it.
Which one of the following is the central flaw in the argument given by the author of the passage?
(A) The author passes over the possibility that Professor Smith had much to gain should Professor Smith’s discovery have found general acceptance.
(B) The author fails to mention whether or not Professor Smith knew that the existence of the alleged new effect was incompatible with established scientific theory.
(C) The author fails to show why the other scientists could not have been presenting evidence in order to establish the truth of the matter.
(D) The author neglects to clarify what his or her relationship to Professor Smith is.
(E) The author fails to indicate what, if any, effect the publication of Professor Smith’s paper had on the public’s confidence in the safety of most drinking water.
Which one of the following is the central flaw in the argument given by the author of the passage?
(A) The author passes over the possibility that Professor Smith had much to gain should Professor Smith’s discovery have found general acceptance.
(B) The author fails to mention whether or not Professor Smith knew that the existence of the alleged new effect was incompatible with established scientific theory.
(C) The author fails to show why the other scientists could not have been presenting evidence in order to establish the truth of the matter.
(D) The author neglects to clarify what his or her relationship to Professor Smith is.
(E) The author fails to indicate what, if any, effect the publication of Professor Smith’s paper had on the public’s confidence in the safety of most drinking water.
05 Mar 2010, 17:45
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hey All,
Though the correct answer has been distinguished and partially explained, I feel that there's room to look a bit deeper. And isn't that what we're all here to do?
Conclusion: Scientists were threatened and trying to discredit theory
Premise: Smith published paper that disagreed with other scientists, those scientists are trying to prove it wrong
Assumption: The scientists don't have any other reason to prove it wrong but to discredit it
Notice that this assumption falls into an "eliminate alternate paths" category. Basically, we're told that something is happening, and then directed towards the reason why. But there is no justification for that reason, so we would need an assumption that eliminates other possible reasons. The correct answer will inevitably take advantage of this.
(A) The author passes over the possibility that Professor Smith had much to gain should Professor Smith’s discovery have found general acceptance.
PROBLEM: What we care about is the intentions of the other scientists, not of Professor Smith himself.
(B) The author fails to mention whether or not Professor Smith knew that the existence of the alleged new effect was incompatible with established scientific theory.
PROBLEM: Once again, the conclusion here relates to the OTHER scientists, not Smith himself. Whether or not Smith knew if his research was faulty or not doesn't affect the intentions of the other scientists.
(C) The author fails to show why the other scientists could not have been presenting evidence in order to establish the truth of the matter.
ANSWER: This establishes that the other scientists could have had some motive other than petty payback.
(D) The author neglects to clarify what his or her relationship to Professor Smith is.
PROBLEM: This is entirely out of scope. We don't need to know where the author comes into things.
(E) The author fails to indicate what, if any, effect the publication of Professor Smith’s paper had on the public’s confidence in the safety of most drinking water.
PROBLEM: Out of scope again. We care about Smith and the other scientists, not the public.
Hope that helps!
-t
Though the correct answer has been distinguished and partially explained, I feel that there's room to look a bit deeper. And isn't that what we're all here to do?
Conclusion: Scientists were threatened and trying to discredit theory
Premise: Smith published paper that disagreed with other scientists, those scientists are trying to prove it wrong
Assumption: The scientists don't have any other reason to prove it wrong but to discredit it
Notice that this assumption falls into an "eliminate alternate paths" category. Basically, we're told that something is happening, and then directed towards the reason why. But there is no justification for that reason, so we would need an assumption that eliminates other possible reasons. The correct answer will inevitably take advantage of this.
(A) The author passes over the possibility that Professor Smith had much to gain should Professor Smith’s discovery have found general acceptance.
PROBLEM: What we care about is the intentions of the other scientists, not of Professor Smith himself.
(B) The author fails to mention whether or not Professor Smith knew that the existence of the alleged new effect was incompatible with established scientific theory.
PROBLEM: Once again, the conclusion here relates to the OTHER scientists, not Smith himself. Whether or not Smith knew if his research was faulty or not doesn't affect the intentions of the other scientists.
(C) The author fails to show why the other scientists could not have been presenting evidence in order to establish the truth of the matter.
ANSWER: This establishes that the other scientists could have had some motive other than petty payback.
(D) The author neglects to clarify what his or her relationship to Professor Smith is.
PROBLEM: This is entirely out of scope. We don't need to know where the author comes into things.
(E) The author fails to indicate what, if any, effect the publication of Professor Smith’s paper had on the public’s confidence in the safety of most drinking water.
PROBLEM: Out of scope again. We care about Smith and the other scientists, not the public.
Hope that helps!
-t
General Discussion
03 Jun 2010, 03:06
Kudos
Bookmarks
@Tommy
Sorry but I am going to probe this a little further since I am unable to comprehend the solution completely...
In the argument, the author states that the opposing scientists published several papers to prove the professors conclusion wrong.
If the above is true then how can we state that the author fails to show evidence that establishes the truth of the matter?
They have in fact published papers to prove the professor wrong.
Please correct me if I am wrong here..
Cheers
Sid
Sorry but I am going to probe this a little further since I am unable to comprehend the solution completely...
In the argument, the author states that the opposing scientists published several papers to prove the professors conclusion wrong.
If the above is true then how can we state that the author fails to show evidence that establishes the truth of the matter?
They have in fact published papers to prove the professor wrong.
Please correct me if I am wrong here..
Cheers
Sid
