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 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
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.
09 Sep 2024, 07:02
Kudos
Bookmarks
C
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
35%
(medium)
Question Stats:
77% (01:55) correct
23%
(02:12)
wrong
based on 776
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
To combat persistent counterfeiting, Lacland's currency was redesigned to include images that cannot be convincingly duplicated by the means that were successfully used to counterfeit the old bills. Last year, after the old currency was replaced, many crude counterfeits of the new bills were detected. But now it has been several months since any counterfeit currency has been found. Clearly, therefore, the introduction of the new currency has effectively thwarted would-be counterfeiters of Lacland's currency.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
(A) The only people who attempted to counterfeit Lacland's new currency were those who had already successfully counterfeited its old currency.
(B) The methods used to counterfeit Lacland's old currency cannot be used to successfully counterfeit the currency of any other country.
(C) Would-be counterfeiters do not now have at their disposal methods of counterfeiting that are more sophisticated than those that were formerly successful.
(D) Increasing the penalties for counterfeiting without redesigning the currency would not have resulted in a significant decrease in counterfeiting in Lacland.
(E) Lacland's currency is worth more now than when the new bills were first introduced.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
(A) The only people who attempted to counterfeit Lacland's new currency were those who had already successfully counterfeited its old currency.
(B) The methods used to counterfeit Lacland's old currency cannot be used to successfully counterfeit the currency of any other country.
(C) Would-be counterfeiters do not now have at their disposal methods of counterfeiting that are more sophisticated than those that were formerly successful.
(D) Increasing the penalties for counterfeiting without redesigning the currency would not have resulted in a significant decrease in counterfeiting in Lacland.
(E) Lacland's currency is worth more now than when the new bills were first introduced.
17 Sep 2024, 19:26
Kudos
Bookmarks
To combat persistent counterfeiting, Lacland's currency was redesigned to include images that cannot be convincingly duplicated by the means that were successfully used to counterfeit the old bills. Last year, after the old currency was replaced, many crude counterfeits of the new bills were detected. But now it has been several months since any counterfeit currency has been found. Clearly, therefore, the introduction of the new currency has effectively thwarted would-be counterfeiters of Lacland's currency.
The conclusion of the argument is the following:
Clearly ... the introduction of the new currency has effectively thwarted would-be counterfeiters of Lacland's currency.
The support for the conclusion is the following:
it has been several months since any counterfeit currency has been found
We see that the reasoning of the argument is that, since no counterfeits of the new bills have been found in several months, the introduction of the new bills must be preventing counterfeiting of Lacland's currency.
One issue that might jump out at us is that the fact that counterfeits of the new bills have not been found doesn't necessarily mean that none are out there. It could be that counterfeiters have come up with ways to make convincing duplicates of the bills that have gone undetected.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
This is an Assumption question, and the correct answer will be something that must be true for the premise to effectively support the conclusion.
(A) The only people who attempted to counterfeit Lacland's new currency were those who had already successfully counterfeited its old currency.
This choice isn't an assumption on which the argument depends.
After all, it doesn't really matter who attempted to counterfeit Lacland's new currency.
After all, even if people who had not counterfeited the old currency attempted to counterfeit the new currency, no counterfeit bills have been found in several months. So, apparently, counterfeiters have given up.
Eliminate.
(B) The methods used to counterfeit Lacland's old currency cannot be used to successfully counterfeit the currency of any other country.
This choice isn't an assumption on which the argument depends.
After all, even if the methods used to counterfeit Lacland's old currency can be used to successfully counterfeit the currency of any other country, they no longer can be used to counterfeit Lacland's currency.
So, since the conclusion is about success in thwarting counterfeiters of Lacland's currency, not counterfeiters of the currency of any other country, the argument works even if this choice is not true.
Eliminate.
(C) Would-be counterfeiters do not now have at their disposal methods of counterfeiting that are more sophisticated than those that were formerly successful.
This choice is interesting.
After all, if this choice is not true, and would-be counterfeiters DO now have at their disposal methods of counterfeiting that are more sophisticated than those that were formerly successful, then it's possible that the reason "it has been several months since any counterfeit currency has been found" could be that counterfeiters have been using sophisticated methods that enable them to convincingly duplicate the images on the new bills. In that case, it could be that there are counterfeit bills in circulation but no counterfeit bills have been found because they are hard to detect.
Of course, in that case, the fact that no counterfeit bills have been found for months does not mean that "the introduction of the new currency has effectively thwarted would-be counterfeiters of Lacland's currency."
So, for the argument to work, it must be the case that this choice is true.
Keep.
(D) Increasing the penalties for counterfeiting without redesigning the currency would not have resulted in a significant decrease in counterfeiting in Lacland.
Notice that the conclusion is basically that redesigning the currency worked.
Now, this choice says basically that another approach would not have worked.
Concluding from the evidence that redesigning the currency worked does not require assuming that another approach would not have worked. After all, even if another approach would have worked, it could still be the case that the approach used, redesigning the currency, worked.
After all, it can be possible to accomplish something in more than one way.
So, this choice is not a necessary assumption.
Eliminate.
(E) Lacland's currency is worth more now than when the new bills were first introduced.
This choice might follow from what the passage says. After all, persistent counterfeiting of Lacland's currency could have caused a reduction in value of the currency if people felt that there was a significant risk than any of Lacland's currency received may have been counterfeit. So, it could make sense that, after the new bills were introduced, the currency became worth more.
At the same time, we don't need a conclusion that follows from the passage. We need an assumption on which the argument depends, and the argument doesn't depend on this choice.
After all, regardless of whether Lacland's currency is worth more now than when the bills were first introduced, the fact that no counterfeit bills have been found for several months could mean that the introduction of the new currency has effectively thwarted would-be counterfeiters of Lacland's currency.
Eliminate.
Correct answer: C
The conclusion of the argument is the following:
Clearly ... the introduction of the new currency has effectively thwarted would-be counterfeiters of Lacland's currency.
The support for the conclusion is the following:
it has been several months since any counterfeit currency has been found
We see that the reasoning of the argument is that, since no counterfeits of the new bills have been found in several months, the introduction of the new bills must be preventing counterfeiting of Lacland's currency.
One issue that might jump out at us is that the fact that counterfeits of the new bills have not been found doesn't necessarily mean that none are out there. It could be that counterfeiters have come up with ways to make convincing duplicates of the bills that have gone undetected.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
This is an Assumption question, and the correct answer will be something that must be true for the premise to effectively support the conclusion.
(A) The only people who attempted to counterfeit Lacland's new currency were those who had already successfully counterfeited its old currency.
This choice isn't an assumption on which the argument depends.
After all, it doesn't really matter who attempted to counterfeit Lacland's new currency.
After all, even if people who had not counterfeited the old currency attempted to counterfeit the new currency, no counterfeit bills have been found in several months. So, apparently, counterfeiters have given up.
Eliminate.
(B) The methods used to counterfeit Lacland's old currency cannot be used to successfully counterfeit the currency of any other country.
This choice isn't an assumption on which the argument depends.
After all, even if the methods used to counterfeit Lacland's old currency can be used to successfully counterfeit the currency of any other country, they no longer can be used to counterfeit Lacland's currency.
So, since the conclusion is about success in thwarting counterfeiters of Lacland's currency, not counterfeiters of the currency of any other country, the argument works even if this choice is not true.
Eliminate.
(C) Would-be counterfeiters do not now have at their disposal methods of counterfeiting that are more sophisticated than those that were formerly successful.
This choice is interesting.
After all, if this choice is not true, and would-be counterfeiters DO now have at their disposal methods of counterfeiting that are more sophisticated than those that were formerly successful, then it's possible that the reason "it has been several months since any counterfeit currency has been found" could be that counterfeiters have been using sophisticated methods that enable them to convincingly duplicate the images on the new bills. In that case, it could be that there are counterfeit bills in circulation but no counterfeit bills have been found because they are hard to detect.
Of course, in that case, the fact that no counterfeit bills have been found for months does not mean that "the introduction of the new currency has effectively thwarted would-be counterfeiters of Lacland's currency."
So, for the argument to work, it must be the case that this choice is true.
Keep.
(D) Increasing the penalties for counterfeiting without redesigning the currency would not have resulted in a significant decrease in counterfeiting in Lacland.
Notice that the conclusion is basically that redesigning the currency worked.
Now, this choice says basically that another approach would not have worked.
Concluding from the evidence that redesigning the currency worked does not require assuming that another approach would not have worked. After all, even if another approach would have worked, it could still be the case that the approach used, redesigning the currency, worked.
After all, it can be possible to accomplish something in more than one way.
So, this choice is not a necessary assumption.
Eliminate.
(E) Lacland's currency is worth more now than when the new bills were first introduced.
This choice might follow from what the passage says. After all, persistent counterfeiting of Lacland's currency could have caused a reduction in value of the currency if people felt that there was a significant risk than any of Lacland's currency received may have been counterfeit. So, it could make sense that, after the new bills were introduced, the currency became worth more.
At the same time, we don't need a conclusion that follows from the passage. We need an assumption on which the argument depends, and the argument doesn't depend on this choice.
After all, regardless of whether Lacland's currency is worth more now than when the bills were first introduced, the fact that no counterfeit bills have been found for several months could mean that the introduction of the new currency has effectively thwarted would-be counterfeiters of Lacland's currency.
Eliminate.
Correct answer: C
General Discussion
22 Sep 2024, 10:39
Kudos
Bookmarks
Thanks for the explanation. In a world without Option C, option D would be the best answer, no?
