Farmer: Agricultural techniques such as crop rotation

Question

Farmer: Agricultural techniques such as crop rotation that do not use commercial products may solve agricultural problems at least as well as any technique, such as pesticide application, that does use such products. Nonetheless, no private for-profit corporation will sponsor research that is unlikely to lead to marketable products. Thus, for the most part, only government-sponsored research investigates agricultural techniques that do not use commercial products.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the farmer's argument?

(A) The government sponsors at least some investigations of agricultural techniques that are considered likely to solve agricultural problems and do not use commercial products.

(B) For almost any agricultural problem, there is at least one agricultural technique that does not use commercial products but that would solve that agricultural problem.

(C) Investigations of agricultural techniques are rarely sponsored by individuals or by any entity other than private for-profit corporations or the government.

(D) Most if not all investigations of agricultural techniques that use commercial products are sponsored by private for-profit corporations.

(E) Most if not all government-sponsored agricultural research investigates agricultural techniques that do not use commercial products.

Source: LSAT

gmatexam439 · Accepted Answer

I am no expert, still let me give it a shot. Do let me know in case you have any further doubts.

Farmer: Agricultural techniques such as crop rotation that do not use commercial products may solve agricultural problems at least as well as any technique, such as pesticide application, that does use such products. Nonetheless, no private for-profit corporation will sponsor research that is unlikely to lead to marketable products. Thus, for the most part, only government-sponsored research investigates agricultural techniques that do not use commercial products.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the farmer's argument?

(A) The government sponsors at least some investigations of agricultural techniques that are considered likely to solve agricultural problems and do not use commercial products.  -It is restating the fact given in the premise, that mostly only government sponsored research investigates agricultural techniques that do not use commercial products. This doesn't strengthen the argument.

(B) For almost any agricultural problem, there is at least one agricultural technique that does not use commercial products but that would solve that agricultural problem. - OK, this might be true. Our argument doesn't bother about such a fact. It is out of scope.

(C) Investigations of agricultural techniques are rarely sponsored by individuals or by any entity other than private for-profit corporations or the government. - Looks good lets park it aside for now. Since mostly investigation of agricultural techniques is sponsored by government and as per the stated fact we know that profit making firms don't support such researches, this eliminates any individual's interest in the research. 
Lets try to negate this statement and see its impact on the argument. Since this option should strengthen the argument, the negation should weaken the argument.
Negation:  Investigations of agricultural techniques are  rarely  MOSTLY  sponsored by individuals or by any entity other than private for-profit corporations or the government  -This directly attacks our argument's assumption that MOSTLY ONLY GOVERNMENT SUPPORTS SUCH RESEARCHES.
Thus, this option validly strengthens the argument

(D) Most if not all investigations of agricultural techniques that use commercial products are sponsored by private for-profit corporations. - We are worried about the agricultural researches that do not use commercial products. Out of scope

(E) Most if not all government-sponsored agricultural research investigates agricultural techniques that do not use commercial products. - This is again only restating what's given in the argument. This doesn't strengthen the argument in any way.
Lets try negation here again.
Negation:  Most if not all government-sponsored agricultural researches DO NOT investigate s  agricultural techniques that do not use commercial products  -This statement states that not all government funded researches use commercial products. This might be true, because from the argument we know that mostly only government funds agricultural researches. Since only government funds researches it doesn't mean that all the researches of government are pertaining to the particular type of research. The government might also be researching simultaneously on other things as well. So this point doesn't effect our argument at all.

Always remember, the premise if restated in the options NEVER strengthens the argument.

Hope it helps!

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please leave a kuddo if it helped.

Chets25 · Answer

Why C,...and not E???

Can anyone explain

Farmer: Agricultural techniques such as crop rotation that do not use commercial products may solve agricultural problems at least as well as any technique, such as pesticide application, that does use such products. Nonetheless, no private for-profit corporation will sponsor research that is unlikely to lead to marketable products. Thus, for the most part, only government-sponsored research investigates agricultural techniques that do not use commercial products.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the farmer's argument?

(A) The government sponsors at least some investigations of agricultural techniques that are considered likely to solve agricultural problems and do not use commercial products.

(B) For almost any agricultural problem, there is at least one agricultural technique that does not use commercial products but that would solve that agricultural problem.

(C) Investigations of agricultural techniques are rarely sponsored by individuals or by any entity other than private for-profit corporations or the government.

(D) Most if not all investigations of agricultural techniques that use commercial products are sponsored by private for-profit corporations.

(E) Most if not all government-sponsored agricultural research investigates agricultural techniques that do not use commercial products.

manubath · Answer

The conclusion says that only government sponsored research investigates agricultural techniques that do not use commercial products.

C limits the research to for profit org and govt org. In combination with the stimulus' premises, it strengthens the conclusion. E doesn't mention the for profit orgs. So C seems better option to me.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using  GMAT Club Forum mobile app

hellosanthosh2k2 · Answer

I chose E, but now C makes more sense.

Basically, we want to strengthen the conclusion that "only government-sponsored research investigates agricultural techniques that do not use commercial products".
Already argument mentions that "no private for-profit corporation will sponsor research that is unlikely to lead to marketable products". So we have to eliminate any other possible sponsor to strengthen "for most part goverment investigates".

Choice C, exactly eliminates other possible sponsors.

Thanks,
Always welcome any flaw with my reasoning, will help me learn more

chesstitans · Answer

this question is from LSAT and the question looks much different from a normal gmat. I doubt this question will appear on the gmat exam. Nevertheless, the pattern in C is same to the pattern in gmat; it fills a gap in the argument.

TaN1213 · Answer

Loved the question-very carefully laid traps in options.
  What we know  : No private company will fund these agricultural techniques because they would not fetch the companies any business.
  What author concludes  -   Thus, for the most part, only government  -sponsored research investigates such agricultural techniques.

Author is worried that the burden of sponsoring is going to fall upon the government.

What if someone else sponsors these? Then government will not have to worry then. The conclusion will break and author will be relieved.

We need to  strengthen  (Can't see the author happy here)- 
Remove the only possibility that the author thought could break the conclusion. No angel (third party/independent entity) is going to come and help the author.
-C-

AkashM · Answer

Farmer's conclusion: Private for-profit companies will not invest, so usually only Government sponsor's researches that investigates agricultural techniques that do not use commercial products.

The question asks us to find the option that strengthens this conclusion, so here we go:

A. The government sponsors at least some investigations of agricultural techniques that are considered likely to solve agricultural problems and do not use commercial products. -  What we know is that the govt. is the only one who sponsors, whether it does some or all of the investigations we do not know.

B. For almost any agricultural problem, there is at least one agricultural technique that does not use commercial products but that would solve that agricultural problem. -  Premise clearly states that agricultural techniques not using commercial products may solve the problems but doesn't say it will.

C. Investigations of agricultural techniques are rarely sponsored by individuals or by any entity other than private for-profit corporations or the government. -  This removes the possibility that any other institution might sponsor this technique. Raises the question, who does then? private for-profit doesn't..that leaves only Governments. Strengthens the argument!

D. Most if not all investigations of agricultural techniques that use commercial products are sponsored by private for-profit corporations. -  The argument tells us what private companies doesn't do, so lets us not speculate on what they might do.

(E) Most if not all government-sponsored agricultural research investigates agricultural techniques that do not use commercial products. -  Same as A.

Hope this helps!

(Ignore the typos please)

samarpan.g28 · Answer

Hi  KarishmaB , can you please help me understand this? This is what I understood - we need to strengthen the farmer's argument with a statement that states why the govt has to sponsor agricultural research that does not use commercial products. I chose option D because it says that if researches with commercial products are mostly sponsored by for-profit organizations, then the researches which does not involve the same, are left to be sponsored by the govt only.

The correct answer choice C, is baffling to me. We are focused upon for-profit and the govt to sponsor the agricultural research in the entire passage, how does this option strengthen the argument?

Farmer: Agricultural techniques such as crop rotation

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Farmer: Agricultural techniques such as crop rotation

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards