Because people are generally better at detecting mistakes in others’

Question

Because people are generally better at detecting mistakes in others’ work than in their own, a prudent principle is that one should always have one’s own work checked by someone else.

Which one of the following provides the best illustration of the principle above?

(A) The best elementary school math teachers are not those for whom math was always easy. Teachers who had to struggle through math themselves are better able to explain math to students.

(B) One must make a special effort to clearly explain one’s views to someone else; people normally find it easier to understand their own views than to understand others’ views.

(C) Juries composed of legal novices, rather than panels of lawyers, should be the final arbiters in legal proceedings. People who are not legal experts are in a better position to detect good legal arguments by lawyers than are other lawyers.

(D) People should always have their writing proofread by someone else. Someone who does not know in advance what is meant to be said is in a better position to spot typographical errors.

(E) Two people going out for dinner will have a more enjoyable meal if they order for each other. By allowing someone else to choose, one opens oneself up to new and exciting dining experience.

DAkash · Answer

What makes the choice C incorrect?
Could anyone please explain.....

akashb106 · Answer

The question states that people are generally better at detecting mistakes in other's works. 2.) Principle should the same way get his/her work checked by someone else. (C) Juries composed of legal novices, rather than panels of lawyers, should be the final arbiters in legal proceedings. People who are not legal experts are in a better position to detect good legal arguments by lawyers than are other lawyers.--- Incorrect because this differentiates between lawyers and legal novices. The pattern that this answer choice follows is that no other lawyers can detect good legal arguments. But the question says someone else. Now that someone else could be another lawyer, or a legal novice or anybody else for that matter. But this answer choice only limits the SOMEONE ELSE to legal novices. I feel the answer choice would only make sense if the question explicitly stated that The principal should get his work checked by teacher because other principals are not capable of finding errors. (Just trying to create a question that C would fit into) :wink:

Hope this helps. :-D

KanupriyaS · Answer

I narrowed it down to B and D. Finally chose D.

(A) The best elementary school math teachers are not those for whom math was always easy. Teachers who had to struggle through math themselves are better able to explain math to students.  Incorrect. Out of scope. 
(B) One must make a special effort to clearly explain one’s views to someone else; people normally find it easier to understand their own views than to understand others’ views.  Maybe but 'special effort to clearly explain one's view' does not convey the correct meaning.  
(C) Juries composed of legal novices, rather than panels of lawyers, should be the final arbiters in legal proceedings. People who are not legal experts are in a better position to detect good legal arguments by lawyers than are other lawyers.  Incorrect. Too strong to fit into the analogy. One needs to make too many assumptions to consider this true.  
(D) People should always have their writing proofread by someone else. Someone who does not know in advance what is meant to be said is in a better position to spot typographical errors.   Correct. It clearly conveys the intended meaning.   
(E) Two people going out for dinner will have a more enjoyable meal if they order for each other. By allowing someone else to choose, one opens oneself up to new and exciting dining experience.  Incorrect.

Hope my logic is correct.

Desertchampion · Answer

The official explanation is below:

October 2002 LSAT, Section 1, #7. The correct answer choice is (D)

The principle in the stimulus is clearly stated: “one should always have one’s own work checked by
someone else.” Your task is to find the answer that most closely follows that guideline.

Answer choice (A):   
 This answer choice does not contain any work to be checked, and therefore it cannot
illustrate the principle in the stimulus.
 
  Answer choice (B):   
 Although this answer discusses “one’s view,” a view is not the same as “one’s own
work” and therefore the principle cannot be applied to this answer.

Answer choice (C):   
 Although this answer involves the checking of work (juries “check” the work of
lawyers), the heart of this answer is not that one should have one’s own worked checked by others. Rather,
this answer focuses on who is in the best position to do the checking: experts or novices.

Answer choice (D):   
 This is the correct answer. The answer matches the principle by stating that a writer
should have his or her work proofread by others, and then further provides a justification that matches the
premise in the stimulus (that other people are better at detecting errors).

Answer choice (E):   
 Ordering a meal does not qualify as “one’s own work,” nor does eating the meal
qualify as checking the work. Hence, this answer has no attribute that illustrates the principle.

Please give kudos if this was helpful in any way!

unraveled · Answer

Because people are generally better at detecting mistakes in others’ work than in their own, a prudent principle is that one should always have one’s own work checked by someone else.

Which one of the following provides the best illustration of the principle above?

(A) The  best elementary school math teachers  are not those for whom math was always easy.  Teachers who had to struggle  through math themselves  are better able to explain math  to students. - WRONG. Struggling ones are checking anything from best ones. Its like C only.

(B) One must make a special effort to clearly  explain one’s views  to someone else; people normally find it easier to  understand their own views  than to understand others’ views. - WRONG. Not at all parallel.

(C) Juries composed of legal novices, rather than panels of lawyers, should be the  final arbiters in legal proceedings . People who are not legal experts are in a better position to  detect good legal arguments  by lawyers  than are other lawyers . - WRIONG. Though suggests that it does "checking" in a way but it does so in a neutral manner. Had it been formulated such that novices detect arguments of lawyers and present their critique, it could have made some sense then.

(D) People should always have their writing  proofread  by someone else. Someone who does not know in advance what is meant to be said is in a  better position to spot typographical errors . - CORRECT.

(E) Two people going out for dinner will have a  more enjoyable meal  if they order for each other. By allowing someone else to choose, one opens oneself up to  new and exciting dining experience . - WRONG. That experience may result in either way. So, in a way its like passage and it's not.

Answer D.

Kritikahehe · Answer

Can any one explain what is the structure of this question please i made 
 A is better at B 
Than at C 
Hence z should be A

Because people are generally better at detecting mistakes in others’

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

Because people are generally better at detecting mistakes in others’

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