GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video

 It is currently 03 Jun 2020, 22:05

### 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

# Rifka: We do not need to stop

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 30 Apr 2016
Posts: 71
Location: India
GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V38
GPA: 4
Rifka: We do not need to stop  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 May 2017, 22:44
7
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

33% (01:31) correct 67% (01:37) wrong based on 239 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Rifka: We do not need to stop and ask for directions. We would not need to do that unless, of course, we were lost.
Craig: The fact that we are lost is precisely why we need to stop.
In the exchange above, the function of Craig’s comment is to

(A) contradict the conclusion of Rifka’s argument without offering any reason to reject any of Rifka’s implicit premises
(B) deny one of Rifka’s implicit premises and thereby arrive at a different conclusion
(C) imply that Rifka’s argument is invalid by accepting the truth of its premises while rejecting its conclusion
(D) provide a counterexample to Rifka’s generalization
(E) affirm the truth of the stated premise of Rifka’s argument while remaining noncommittal about its conclusion
Intern
Joined: 21 Nov 2014
Posts: 41
Location: India
Schools: ISB '18
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
GPA: 3.7
Re: Rifka: We do not need to stop  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 24 May 2017, 23:38
1
B. Rifkas argument structure-> Conclusion. Premise.
Now this premise contains two sub premises 1. They aren't lost 2. If they are lost they need help.
Rifka decides to stick to Premise 1 and hence the conclusion
But Craig thinks that they are lost. Therefore he doesn't agree with premise 1 and hence arrives at totally opposite conclusion

Sent from my SM-E700H using GMAT Club Forum mobile app

Originally posted by deep14 on 24 May 2017, 23:29.
Last edited by deep14 on 24 May 2017, 23:38, edited 1 time in total.
Director
Status: I don't stop when I'm Tired,I stop when I'm done
Joined: 11 May 2014
Posts: 516
GPA: 2.81
Re: Rifka: We do not need to stop  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 May 2017, 23:30
1
Top Contributor
aurobindomahanty wrote:
Rifka: We do not need to stop and ask for directions. We would not need to do that unless, of course, we were lost.
Craig: The fact that we are lost is precisely why we need to stop.
In the exchange above, the function of Craig’s comment is to

(A) contradict the conclusion of Rifka’s argument without offering any reason to reject any of Rifka’s implicit premises
(B) deny one of Rifka’s implicit premises and thereby arrive at a different conclusion
(C) imply that Rifka’s argument is invalid by accepting the truth of its premises while rejecting its conclusion
(D) provide a counterexample to Rifka’s generalization
(E) affirm the truth of the stated premise of Rifka’s argument while remaining noncommittal about its conclusion

Rifka: We do not need to stop and ask for directions. We would not need to do that unless, of course, we were lost.
Craig: The fact that we are lost is precisely why we need to stop.
In the exchange above, the function of Craig’s comment is to

Rifka: If lost ,then stop and ask
Craig:If lost ,then stop

(A) contradict the conclusion of Rifka’s argument without offering any reason to reject any of Rifka’s implicit premises
(B) deny one of Rifka’s implicit premises and thereby arrive at a different conclusion
(C) imply that Rifka’s argument is invalid by accepting the truth of its premises while rejecting its conclusion
(D) provide a counterexample to Rifka’s generalization
(E) affirm the truth of the stated premise of Rifka’s argument while remaining noncommittal about its conclusion
Manager
Joined: 17 Apr 2016
Posts: 77
Re: Rifka: We do not need to stop  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 May 2017, 18:10
Hey Experts,

Intern
Joined: 15 Aug 2015
Posts: 47
Location: India
Schools: LBS '18, ISB '19
GMAT 1: 610 Q48 V26
GPA: 3.21
Rifka: We do not need to stop  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Nov 2017, 08:34
aurobindomahanty wrote:
Rifka: We do not need to stop and ask for directions. We would not need to do that unless, of course, we were lost.
Craig: The fact that we are lost is precisely why we need to stop.
In the exchange above, the function of Craig’s comment is to

(A) contradict the conclusion of Rifka’s argument without offering any reason to reject any of Rifka’s implicit premises
(B) deny one of Rifka’s implicit premises and thereby arrive at a different conclusion
(C) imply that Rifka’s argument is invalid by accepting the truth of its premises while rejecting its conclusion
(D) provide a counterexample to Rifka’s generalization
(E) affirm the truth of the stated premise of Rifka’s argument while remaining noncommittal about its conclusion

A nice question on conditional Reasoning
I got it wrong in my attempt.
UNLESS INTRODUCES A NECESSARY CONDITION
therefore, If i write the rifika's conclusionWe would not need to do that unless, of course, we were lost in sufficient condition and necessary condition form it will be ((( I will choose if , then indicators to be more precise))

IF we need to stop and ask for directions, then we are lost-------1

A contrapositive (( correct reversal )) of this statement will be
IF we are not lost , then we do not need to stop and ask for directions------2

Coming to Craig's Conclusion The fact that we are lost is precisely why we need to stop.

Compare this to 1 and 2 we find no similarities

Infact this is the wrong negation of the statement 2
Option b says that deny one of Rifka’s implicit premises and thereby arrive at a different conclusion
Craig is coming to a different conclusion by using mistaken reversal of statement 2. Also he is acting against the premise of rifika we do not need to stop and ask for directions .
Intern
Joined: 15 Aug 2015
Posts: 47
Location: India
Schools: LBS '18, ISB '19
GMAT 1: 610 Q48 V26
GPA: 3.21
Rifka: We do not need to stop  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Nov 2017, 08:42
AbdurRakib wrote:
aurobindomahanty wrote:
Rifka: We do not need to stop and ask for directions. We would not need to do that unless, of course, we were lost.
Craig: The fact that we are lost is precisely why we need to stop.
In the exchange above, the function of Craig’s comment is to

(A) contradict the conclusion of Rifka’s argument without offering any reason to reject any of Rifka’s implicit premises
(B) deny one of Rifka’s implicit premises and thereby arrive at a different conclusion
(C) imply that Rifka’s argument is invalid by accepting the truth of its premises while rejecting its conclusion
(D) provide a counterexample to Rifka’s generalization
(E) affirm the truth of the stated premise of Rifka’s argument while remaining noncommittal about its conclusion

Rifka: We do not need to stop and ask for directions. We would not need to do that unless, of course, we were lost.
Craig: The fact that we are lost is precisely why we need to stop.
In the exchange above, the function of Craig’s comment is to

Rifka: If lost ,then stop and ask
Craig:If lost ,then stop

(A) contradict the conclusion of Rifka’s argument without offering any reason to reject any of Rifka’s implicit premises
(B) deny one of Rifka’s implicit premises and thereby arrive at a different conclusion
(C) imply that Rifka’s argument is invalid by accepting the truth of its premises while rejecting its conclusion
(D) provide a counterexample to Rifka’s generalization
(E) affirm the truth of the stated premise of Rifka’s argument while remaining noncommittal about its conclusion

AbdurRakib
Hi AbdurRakib
Though you arrived at the right answer , the form of conditional reasoning you used is wrong
Unless introduces a necessary condition
IF introduces a sufficient condition , then introduces a necessary condition
To find a conditional indicator such as UNLESS we need to write the part before UNLESS BY removing not, as sufficient
condition and the part with UNLESS ,becomes the necessary condition

therefore, If i write the rifika's conclusion
We would not need to do that unless, of course, we were lost in sufficient condition and necessary condition form it will be ((( if , then indicators))

IF we need to stop and ask for directions, then we are lost-------1

A contrapositive (( correct reversal )) of this statement will be
IF we are not lost , then we do not need to stop and ask for directions------2

What you wrote as reasoning is mistaken reversal
Please correct me if i am wrong.
Intern
Joined: 17 Sep 2017
Posts: 42
Re: Rifka: We do not need to stop  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Dec 2017, 07:30
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 9071
Re: Rifka: We do not need to stop  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Aug 2019, 19:58
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.
Re: Rifka: We do not need to stop   [#permalink] 11 Aug 2019, 19:58