NEW HERE? LEARN MORE
closeclose
Last visit was: 27 Apr 2024, 21:56 It is currently 27 Apr 2024, 21:56
Decision Tracker
My Rewards
New posts
New comers' posts

Close
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
Your Progress

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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel

To be horrific, a monster must be threatening. Whether or not it prese

SORT BY:
Date
Kudos
Tags:
Find Similar Topics 
Show Tags
Hide Tags
User avatar
D
Gladiator59
Director
Director
Joined: 16 Sep 2016
Status:It always seems impossible until it's done.
Posts: 645
Own Kudos [?]: 2056 [34]
Given Kudos: 174
GMAT 1: 740 Q50 V40
GMAT 2: 770 Q51 V42
Send PM
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge
To be horrific, a monster must be threatening. Whether or not it prese [#permalink] New post   27 Dec 2018, 04:39
4
Kudos
30
Bookmarks
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

40% (02:33) correct 60% (02:26) wrong based on 859 sessions
Hide Show timer Statistics
To be horrific, a monster must be threatening. Whether or not it presents psychological, moral, or social dangers, or triggers enduring infantile fears, if a monster is physically dangerous then it is threatening. In fact, even a physically benign monster is horrific if it inspires revulsion.

Which one of the following logically follows from the statements above?

(A) Any horror-story monster that is threatening is also horrific.
(B) A monster that is psychologically dangerous, but that does not inspire revulsion, is not horrific.
(C) If a monster triggers infantile fears but is not physically dangerous, then it is not horrific.
(D) If a monster is both horrific and psychologically threatening, then it does not inspire revulsion.
(E) All monsters that are not physically dangerous, but that are psychologically dangerous and inspire revulsion, are threatening.
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
E
User avatar
G
yash312
Manager
Manager
Joined: 28 Aug 2018
Posts: 174
Own Kudos [?]: 163 [1]
Given Kudos: 22
Send PM
Re: To be horrific, a monster must be threatening. Whether or not it prese [#permalink] New post   27 Dec 2018, 05:38
1
Bookmarks
IMO B

To be horrific, a monster must be threatening. Whether or not it presents psychological, moral, or social dangers, or triggers enduring infantile fears, if a monster is physically dangerous then it is threatening. In fact, even a physically benign monster is horrific if it inspires revulsion.

Inference question:

(A) Any horror-story monster that is threatening is also horrific.----> to extreme ( passage just states that a monster must be horrific, it does not mean all monster will be horific)

(B) A monster that is psychologically dangerous, but that does not inspire revulsion, is not horrific.--->correct ( passage states that psychologically dangerous or not, does not matter, but even a benign monster is horific ...if it inspires revulsion)....therefore, the least monster can also be dangerous if it inspires revulsion; therefore, a monster to is horific if it inspires revulsion; so if a monster does not inspire revulsion than it is not horific.

(C) If a monster triggers infantile fears but is not physically dangerous, then it is not horrific.---> incorrect ( passage states, benign monster can also be horific, so physically dangerous would definately be horific; and infantile yes or no, does not matter)

(D) If a monster is both horrific and psychologically threatening, then it does not inspire revulsion.---> incorrect ( opposite of the information infered from passage)

(E) All monsters that are not physically dangerous, but that are psychologically dangerous and inspire revulsion, are threatening.---> to extreme ( passage talks of a monster, not all monsters )
avatar
B
EAvinoo
Intern
Intern
Joined: 21 Nov 2018
Posts: 10
Own Kudos [?]: 5 [0]
Given Kudos: 9
Send PM
Re: To be horrific, a monster must be threatening. Whether or not it prese [#permalink] New post   11 Jan 2019, 20:10
Can any of the experts weigh in here, please? Thanks!

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
P
fitzpratik
Manager
Manager
Joined: 17 Oct 2016
Posts: 227
Own Kudos [?]: 426 [2]
Given Kudos: 49
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Healthcare
Schools: Owen '22 (I) Boston U '22 (A$) Jones '22 (WL) Kenan-Flagler '22 (WA) Olin '22 (WA$)
GPA: 3.05
WE:Pharmaceuticals (Health Care)
Send PM
Reviews Badge
Re: To be horrific, a monster must be threatening. Whether or not it prese [#permalink] New post   Updated on: 11 Jan 2019, 21:07
2
Kudos
To be horrific, a monster must be threatening [to be horrific monster must be threatening, so monster cannot be horrific if it is not threatening]. Whether or not it presents psychological, moral, or social dangers, or triggers enduring infantile fears, if a monster is physically dangerous then it is threatening [Whether monster does any of the underlined things, IF monster is physically dangerous then it is threatening, that means regardless of whether monster does any of the underlined things, and for them to be threatening, monster has to be physically dangerous]. In fact, even a physically benign monster is horrific if it inspires revulsion.

So, to be horrific Three things are required: Threatening, Physically dangerous (As it results in threatening) and revulsion

Which one of the following logically follows from the statements above?

(A) Any horror-story monster that is threatening is also horrific. (Already stated in the argument)
(B) A monster that is psychologically dangerous, but that does not inspire revulsion, is not horrific. (No, as a psychologically dangerous monster may be physically dangerous and subsequently be horrific)
(C) If a monster triggers infantile fears but is not physically dangerous, then it is not horrific. (We dont know if this monster fulfills anyone one of the three criteria for being threatening,as stated above)
(D) If a monster is both horrific and psychologically threatening, then it does not inspire revulsion. (Not necessarily....a monster can be horrific, and so threatening, and may inspire revulsion)
(E) All monsters that are not physically dangerous, but that are psychologically dangerous and inspire revulsion, are threatening. (Correct: any monster who inspires revulsion, and it may be physically benign, is horrific....so a psychologically dangerous monster who inspires revulsion is horrific.)

Originally posted by fitzpratik on 11 Jan 2019, 20:45.
Last edited by fitzpratik on 11 Jan 2019, 21:07, edited 1 time in total.
avatar
B
EAvinoo
Intern
Intern
Joined: 21 Nov 2018
Posts: 10
Own Kudos [?]: 5 [0]
Given Kudos: 9
Send PM
Re: To be horrific, a monster must be threatening. Whether or not it prese [#permalink] New post   11 Jan 2019, 20:51
Thank you! I was confused with “C” but now it’s clear.

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
S
draftpunk
Manager
Manager
Joined: 28 Jan 2017
Posts: 57
Own Kudos [?]: 46 [1]
Given Kudos: 217
Send PM
Reviews Badge
Re: To be horrific, a monster must be threatening. Whether or not it prese [#permalink] New post   08 Nov 2020, 23:11
1
Kudos
fitzpratik wrote:
To be horrific, a monster must be threatening [to be horrific monster must be threatening, so monster cannot be horrific if it is not threatening]. Whether or not it presents psychological, moral, or social dangers, or triggers enduring infantile fears, if a monster is physically dangerous then it is threatening [Whether monster does any of the underlined things, IF monster is physically dangerous then it is threatening, that means regardless of whether monster does any of the underlined things, and for them to be threatening, monster has to be physically dangerous]. In fact, even a physically benign monster is horrific if it inspires revulsion.

So, to be horrific Three things are required: Threatening, Physically dangerous (As it results in threatening) and revulsion

Which one of the following logically follows from the statements above?

(A) Any horror-story monster that is threatening is also horrific. (Already stated in the argument)
(B) A monster that is psychologically dangerous, but that does not inspire revulsion, is not horrific. (No, as a psychologically dangerous monster may be physically dangerous and subsequently be horrific)
(C) If a monster triggers infantile fears but is not physically dangerous, then it is not horrific. (We dont know if this monster fulfills anyone one of the three criteria for being threatening,as stated above)
(D) If a monster is both horrific and psychologically threatening, then it does not inspire revulsion. (Not necessarily....a monster can be horrific, and so threatening, and may inspire revulsion)
(E) All monsters that are not physically dangerous, but that are psychologically dangerous and inspire revulsion, are threatening. (Correct: any monster who inspires revulsion, and it may be physically benign, is horrific....so a psychologically dangerous monster who inspires revulsion is horrific.)


Your explanation for A is not correct -- it is not stated in the argument.

A states: IF threatening, THEN horrific.

However, the first statement is merely stating: ALL horrific ARE threatening.

Subtle difference, but thought I would provide clarification.
avatar
B
user9123
Intern
Intern
Joined: 14 Jun 2020
Posts: 17
Own Kudos [?]: 12 [1]
Given Kudos: 29
Send PM
Re: To be horrific, a monster must be threatening. Whether or not it prese [#permalink] New post   08 Nov 2020, 23:42
1
Kudos
costcosized wrote:
fitzpratik wrote:
To be horrific, a monster must be threatening [to be horrific monster must be threatening, so monster cannot be horrific if it is not threatening]. Whether or not it presents psychological, moral, or social dangers, or triggers enduring infantile fears, if a monster is physically dangerous then it is threatening [Whether monster does any of the underlined things, IF monster is physically dangerous then it is threatening, that means regardless of whether monster does any of the underlined things, and for them to be threatening, monster has to be physically dangerous]. In fact, even a physically benign monster is horrific if it inspires revulsion.

So, to be horrific Three things are required: Threatening, Physically dangerous (As it results in threatening) and revulsion

Which one of the following logically follows from the statements above?

(A) Any horror-story monster that is threatening is also horrific. (Already stated in the argument)
(B) A monster that is psychologically dangerous, but that does not inspire revulsion, is not horrific. (No, as a psychologically dangerous monster may be physically dangerous and subsequently be horrific)
(C) If a monster triggers infantile fears but is not physically dangerous, then it is not horrific. (We dont know if this monster fulfills anyone one of the three criteria for being threatening,as stated above)
(D) If a monster is both horrific and psychologically threatening, then it does not inspire revulsion. (Not necessarily....a monster can be horrific, and so threatening, and may inspire revulsion)
(E) All monsters that are not physically dangerous, but that are psychologically dangerous and inspire revulsion, are threatening. (Correct: any monster who inspires revulsion, and it may be physically benign, is horrific....so a psychologically dangerous monster who inspires revulsion is horrific.)


Your explanation for A is not correct -- it is not stated in the argument.

A states: IF threatening, THEN horrific.

However, the first statement is merely stating: ALL horrific ARE threatening.

Subtle difference, but thought I would provide clarification.


I agree, to put it another way :

Passage says: To be horrific, a monster must be threatening.

Horrific => implies threatening

But not visa versa, threatening not does necessarily imply horrific.

Choice A is not right because the article only says A => B not B => A

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
B
akt715
Manager
Manager
Joined: 12 May 2021
Posts: 74
Own Kudos [?]: 6 [1]
Given Kudos: 126
Send PM
Re: To be horrific, a monster must be threatening. Whether or not it prese [#permalink] New post   12 Oct 2021, 03:20
1
Kudos
Why C is incorrect , can anyone explain???
User avatar
L
AnirudhaS
LBS Moderator
Joined: 30 Oct 2019
Posts: 836
Own Kudos [?]: 775 [1]
Given Kudos: 1577
Send PM
Re: To be horrific, a monster must be threatening. Whether or not it prese [#permalink] New post   12 Oct 2021, 15:09
1
Kudos
akt715 wrote:
Why C is incorrect , can anyone explain???

(C) If a monster triggers infantile fears but is not physically dangerous, then it is not horrific.

From the stimulus we know,
Horrific if threatening
C says it is not horrific, so we have to prove monster is not threatening.

If monster is physically dangerous THEN it is threatening.
However, this does not necessarily mean the following - If monster is not physically dangerous THEN it is not threatening.

So we cannot conclude that the monster in question is actually not threatening. Hence, C cannot be inferred.
User avatar
P
BIGDAMNGOD
Manager
Manager
Joined: 20 Mar 2020
Posts: 92
Own Kudos [?]: 205 [0]
Given Kudos: 95
Location: India
Schools: Stern '25 CBS '25 Fuqua '25 Kellogg '25 Cornell '25 Yale '25
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
GPA: 4
Send PM
Re: To be horrific, a monster must be threatening. Whether or not it prese [#permalink] New post   12 Mar 2022, 22:43
(E)
Attackformal logicquestions withconfidence,or skipthem
with confidence.

At the heart of this initially confusing set of statements are
three if/then statements, rewritten in order as:
If a monster is horrific, then it’s threatening.
If a monster is physically dangerous,
then it’s threatening.
If a monsteris physically benign yet inspires revulsion,
then it’s horrific.

The rest of the stimulus is a lot of irrelevancy—note the
phrase “Whether or not,” which means that everything else
in the clause is irrelevant to the discussion. No prephrasing
advisable; attack the choices in turn.

(A) commits the common logical error of reversing a
statement’s (the firstone’s)if- and then-clauses. (A) is merely
testingwhether youproperly translated thefirst sentence.

(B)
leaves out the issue of whether the monster in question is
threatening, so its horrific nature remains up in the air.

(C) isn’t
necessarily true, since a physically benign (e.g., notphysically
dangerous) monster could inspire revulsion and hence be
horrific.

(D),too,isnotnecessarilytrue;(D)’sif-clauseistotally
self-contained in that it describes a threatening and horrific
monster, so inspiring revulsion may or may not be part of the
package.

(E) rewards yourpatience.It’s inferablebasedonthelastand
first sentences, in that order: If physically benign monsters
inspire revulsion (as (E)’s monsters do), they’re horrific; and
if they’re horrific they are threatening; and that’s exactly
what (E)concludes.That (E) tosses intheirrelevantissueof
psychological danger is of no importance
User avatar
B
vinayparkash
Intern
Intern
Joined: 16 Jan 2023
Status:sde
Affiliations: wert
Posts: 8
Own Kudos [?]: 10 [0]
Given Kudos: 21
er: yt
Send PM
Re: To be horrific, a monster must be threatening. Whether or not it prese [#permalink] New post   27 May 2023, 05:15
The best way to solve such problems is using a venn diagram: the 'If' part will go in the inner circle, 'Then' part will make the outer circle.
Now, premises can be expressed as mentioned above.
given:-
1. If horr(H) - then threatening(T)
2. if Physically Dangerous(PD)- then Threatening(T)
3. If Revulsion(R)- then H

make the venn diagrams now:

Now evaluate the choices based on above venn diagram. You will never commit a mistake. just make sure you correctly weigh the options.
GMAT Club Bot
gmatclubot
Re: To be horrific, a monster must be threatening. Whether or not it prese [#permalink]
27 May 2023, 05:15
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6923 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts
mysterymanrog
CR Forum Moderator
832 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne
Main navigation
GMAT Resources
Partners
MBA Resources
www.gmac.com|www.mba.com | | GMAT Club Rules | Terms and Conditions