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.
Nov 1811:00 AM PST
-12:00 PM PST
Join us in a live GMAT practice session and solve 30 challenging GMAT questions with other test takers in timed conditions, covering GMAT Quant, Data Sufficiency, Data Insights, Reading Comprehension, and Critical Reasoning questions.
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
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. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
Updated on: 10 Apr 2020, 01:14
Originally posted by Mkrishnabdrr on 22 Jun 2017, 18:05.
Last edited by Bunuel on 10 Apr 2020, 01:14, edited 2 times in total.
Last edited by Bunuel on 10 Apr 2020, 01:14, 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:
15%
(low)
Question Stats:
82% (01:36) correct
18%
(01:44)
wrong
based on 624
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
The law firm of Sutherlin, Perez, and Associates is one of the most successful law firms whose primary specialization is in criminal defense cases. In fact, the firm has a better than 90 percent acquittal rate in such cases. Dalton is an attorney whose primary specialization is in divorce cases, so Dalton certainly cannot be a member of Sutherlin, Perez, and
Associates.
The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument
(A) offers in support of its conclusion pieces of evidence that are mutually contradictory
(B) overlooks the possibility that a person can practice law without being a member of a law firm
(C) concludes that someone is not a member of a group on the grounds that that person does not have a characteristic that the group as a whole has
(D) takes a high rate of success among the members of a group to indicate that the successes are evenly spread among the members
(E) states a generalization based on a selection that is not representative of the group about which the generalization is supposed to hold true
Associates.
The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument
(A) offers in support of its conclusion pieces of evidence that are mutually contradictory
(B) overlooks the possibility that a person can practice law without being a member of a law firm
(C) concludes that someone is not a member of a group on the grounds that that person does not have a characteristic that the group as a whole has
(D) takes a high rate of success among the members of a group to indicate that the successes are evenly spread among the members
(E) states a generalization based on a selection that is not representative of the group about which the generalization is supposed to hold true
23 Jun 2017, 05:58
Kudos
Bookmarks
The argument presents a generalized scenario and then talks about an individual.
It says since the firm is specialized in one skill while the person is specialized in another skill so that person doesn't belong to this firm.
We need to find out the flaw in the reasoning:
(A) offers in support of its conclusion pieces of evidence that are mutually contradictory : We are not told the two things are contradictory.
(B) overlooks the possibility that a person can practice law without being a member of a law firm : No, it is actually saying since that person is not practicing that thing, so he is not the member, This point is the other way round.
(C) concludes that someone is not a member of a group on the grounds that that person does not have a characteristic that the group as a whole has : Yes, so this is what the author is saying. Since that person doesn't have those characteristics, he cannot be the member of that group. Oh come on !!
(D) takes a high rate of success among the members of a group to indicate that the successes are evenly spread among the members : Success?? What is this?
(E) states a generalization based on a selection that is not representative of the group about which the generalization is supposed to hold true : He is using specialization from generalization. While the option is saying the other way round.
It says since the firm is specialized in one skill while the person is specialized in another skill so that person doesn't belong to this firm.
We need to find out the flaw in the reasoning:
(A) offers in support of its conclusion pieces of evidence that are mutually contradictory : We are not told the two things are contradictory.
(B) overlooks the possibility that a person can practice law without being a member of a law firm : No, it is actually saying since that person is not practicing that thing, so he is not the member, This point is the other way round.
(C) concludes that someone is not a member of a group on the grounds that that person does not have a characteristic that the group as a whole has : Yes, so this is what the author is saying. Since that person doesn't have those characteristics, he cannot be the member of that group. Oh come on !!
(D) takes a high rate of success among the members of a group to indicate that the successes are evenly spread among the members : Success?? What is this?
(E) states a generalization based on a selection that is not representative of the group about which the generalization is supposed to hold true : He is using specialization from generalization. While the option is saying the other way round.
23 Jun 2017, 10:16
Kudos
Bookmarks
Imo C easy one
concludes that someone is not a member of a group on the grounds that that person does not have a characteristic that the group as a whole has
It tells us what the argument is missing
concludes that someone is not a member of a group on the grounds that that person does not have a characteristic that the group as a whole has
It tells us what the argument is missing
