To accommodate the personal automobile, houses are built on widely

Question

To accommodate the personal automobile, houses are built on widely scattered lots far from places of work and shopping malls are equipped with immense parking lots that leave little room for wooded areas. Hence, had people generally not used personal automobiles, the result would have to have been a geography of modern cities quite different from the one we have now.

The argument's reasoning is questionable because the argument

A. infers from the idea that the current geography of modern cities resulted from a particular cause that it could only have resulted from that cause
B. infers from the idea that the current geography of modern cities resulted from a particular cause that other facets of modern life resulted from that cause
C. overlooks the fact that many technological innovations other than the personal automobile have had some effect on the way people live
D. takes for granted that shopping malls do not need large parking lots even given the use of the personal automobile
E. takes for granted that people ultimately want to live without personal automobiles

relic7 · Answer

The primary motive would be to weaken the premise that the personal automobile was the primary (and only) root cause of the current geography which option A does.

QQRamanQQ · Answer

Want to understand why option B is wrong. I was confused between A and B and wrongly chose A over B. Can anyone help?

tinbq · Answer

Hi experts,
Please help to explain why each choice is right or wrong. Thanks.

CrackverbalGMAT · Answer

A. infers from the idea that the current geography of modern cities resulted from a particular cause that it could only have resulted from that cause  Correct answer. Current geography of cities results from a cause (personal automobiles). The stimulus then goes on to say that if that cause were absent ("had people generally not used personal automobiles..."), the geography would be different ie; no other cause could have caused it.

B. infers from the idea that the current geography of modern cities resulted from a particular cause that other facets of modern life resulted from that cause  Current geography of cities results from a cause (personal automobiles). The stimulus does not then argue that  other facets  of modern life are caused by personal automobiles. Eliminate.

C. overlooks the fact that many technological innovations other than the personal automobile have had some effect on the way people live  The stimulus does not draw any conclusion on "the way people live" hence there is no question of overlooking other innovations for that effect. Eliminate.

D. takes for granted that shopping malls do not need large parking lots even given the use of the personal automobile  The stimulus does not state that "shopping malls do not need large parking lots" at all. Eliminate.

E. takes for granted that people ultimately want to live without personal automobiles  The stimulus does not state that "people ultimately want to live without personal automobiles" at all. Eliminate.

Hope this helps.

siddharth_ · Answer

Here, 
P: A caused B (Personal automobile -> Current Geography). 
C: No A would have caused no B.
Flaw : ONLY A caused B and there could had been no other cause.

Now my confusion is, whenever we 'conclude' A caused B, doesn't it imply ONLY A caused B? And thus we have the following 4 assumptions - 
1. B didn't cause A
2. C didn't cause B
3. C didn't cause A and B
4. B can't happen without A = No A will cause no B

Why do we have the 4th statement above as the flaw in this question? Is it because the causation here is in the premise and not the conclusion? Does this mean that 'A causes B' = 'ONLY A causes B' ONLY if the conclusion states the causation and the same is not true for the premise?

bb · Answer

Sorry but this is poorly worded question. I would probably skip it for all the bad grammar.

To accommodate the personal automobile, houses are built on widely

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

To accommodate the personal automobile, houses are built on widely

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