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 1310:00 AM EST
-12:00 PM EST
Have you ever wondered how to score a PERFECT 805 on the GMAT? Meet Julia, a banking professional who used the Target Test Prep course to achieve this incredible feat. Julia's story is nothing short of an inspiration.
Dec 1410:00 AM EST
-12:00 PM EST
Think a 100% GMAT Verbal score is out of your reach? Target Test Prep will make you think again! Our course uses techniques such as topical study and spaced repetition to maximize knowledge retention and make studying simple and fun.
Dec 1411:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this session to learn how to Deconstruct arguments, Pre-Think Author’s Assumptions, and apply Negation Test.- Dec 15
11:00 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 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!
aurobindomahanty
GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V38
Posts: 66
12 Jul 2017, 06:32
Kudos
Bookmarks
C
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
75%
(hard)
Question Stats:
45% (01:38) correct
55%
(01:51)
wrong
based on 339
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Television host: While it's true that the defendant presented a strong alibi and considerable exculpatory evidence and was quickly acquitted by the jury, I still believe that there must be good reason to think that the defendant is not completely innocent in the case. Otherwise, the prosecutor would not have brought charges in the first place.
The reasoning in the television host's argument is flawed in that the argument
(A) takes lack of evidence for a view as grounds for concluding that the view is false
(B) presupposes as evidence the conclusion that it is trying to establish
(C) places undue reliance on the judgments of an authority figure
(D) confuses legal standards for guilt with moral standards for guilt
(E) concludes that a judgment is suspicious merely on the grounds that it was reached quickly
Source: LSAT
The reasoning in the television host's argument is flawed in that the argument
(A) takes lack of evidence for a view as grounds for concluding that the view is false
(B) presupposes as evidence the conclusion that it is trying to establish
(C) places undue reliance on the judgments of an authority figure
(D) confuses legal standards for guilt with moral standards for guilt
(E) concludes that a judgment is suspicious merely on the grounds that it was reached quickly
Source: LSAT
sobby
Current Student
Joined: 14 Nov 2014
Last visit: 24 Jan 2022
Posts: 449
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 54
Location: India
Schools: Rotman '20 (S) Kelley '21 (S) (A)
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.76
12 Jul 2017, 07:44
Kudos
Bookmarks
aurobindomahanty
Television host: While it's true that the defendant presented a strong alibi and considerable exculpatory evidence and was quickly acquitted by the jury, I still believe that there must be good reason to think that the defendant is not completely innocent in the case. Otherwise, the prosecutor would not have brought charges in the first place.
The reasoning in the television host's argument is flawed in that the argument
(A) takes lack of evidence for a view as grounds for concluding that the view is false
(B) presupposes as evidence the conclusion that it is trying to establish
(C) places undue reliance on the judgments of an authority figure
(D) confuses legal standards for guilt with moral standards for guilt
(E) concludes that a judgment is suspicious merely on the grounds that it was reached quickly
Source: LSAT
The reasoning in the television host's argument is flawed in that the argument
(A) takes lack of evidence for a view as grounds for concluding that the view is false
(B) presupposes as evidence the conclusion that it is trying to establish
(C) places undue reliance on the judgments of an authority figure
(D) confuses legal standards for guilt with moral standards for guilt
(E) concludes that a judgment is suspicious merely on the grounds that it was reached quickly
Source: LSAT
this is a good question ..definitely not a sub 600 level .....
""the prosecutor would not have brought charges in the first place""---it reflect that if prosecutor brought case in the court , defendant would be involved in some crime .
it is kind of faith towards the position of lawyer...
A-Television host is not arguing any thing about lack of evidence .
B-out
C- Yes, as per highlighted above
D-nothing about relation of moral and legal standards.
E-it is just a fact that judgement reached quickly ..television host is not arguing on this ...
02 Mar 2018, 05:11
Kudos
Bookmarks
aurobindomahanty
Television host: While it's true that the defendant presented a strong alibi and considerable exculpatory evidence and was quickly acquitted by the jury, I still believe that there must be good reason to think that the defendant is not completely innocent in the case. Otherwise, the prosecutor would not have brought charges in the first place.
The reasoning in the television host's argument is flawed in that the argument
(A) takes lack of evidence for a view as grounds for concluding that the view is false
(B) presupposes as evidence the conclusion that it is trying to establish
(C) places undue reliance on the judgments of an authority figure
(D) confuses legal standards for guilt with moral standards for guilt
(E) concludes that a judgment is suspicious merely on the grounds that it was reached quickly
Source: LSAT
The reasoning in the television host's argument is flawed in that the argument
(A) takes lack of evidence for a view as grounds for concluding that the view is false
(B) presupposes as evidence the conclusion that it is trying to establish
(C) places undue reliance on the judgments of an authority figure
(D) confuses legal standards for guilt with moral standards for guilt
(E) concludes that a judgment is suspicious merely on the grounds that it was reached quickly
Source: LSAT
A. He does not take as grounds the lack of evidence. His argument is that prosecutor has brought charges. Out.
B. Conclusion is that the defendant is guilty in the opinion of television host. It simply can not be the evidence. Out.
C. The host says that prosecutor has brought charges ----> the defendant is guilty ---> yes, he relyes to much on prosecutor. True.
D. Nothing about moral in the passage. Out.
E. The information that the judjment was reached quickly is minor. The major information (the grounds) is that prosecutor has brought charges.
