Marthas friend, who is very knowledgeable about edible flowers, told

Question

Martha’s friend, who is very knowledgeable about edible flowers, told Martha that there are no edible daisies, at least not any that are palatable. Martha, however, reasons that since there are daisies that are a kind of chrysanthemum and since there are edible chrysanthemums that are quite palatable, what her friend told her must be incorrect.

Which one of the following has a flawed pattern of reasoning most like that in Martha’s reasoning?

(A) Jeanne is a member of the city chorus, and the city chorus is renowned. So Jeanne is an excellent singer.

(B) Rolfe belongs to the library reading group, and all members of that group are avid readers. So Rolfe is an avid reader.

(C) Some of Noriko’s sisters are on the debate team, and some members of the debate team are poor students. So at least one of Noriko’s sisters must be a poor student.

(D) Most of Leo’s friends are good swimmers, and quite strong. So it is likely that at least some of Leon’s friends are quite strong.

(E) Many of Teresa’s colleagues have written books. Most of the books they have written are on good writing. So some of Teresa’s colleagues are good writers.

GDT · Answer

Martha’s friend, who is very knowledgeable about edible flowers, told Martha that there are no edible daisies, at least not any that are palatable. Martha, however, reasons that since there are daisies that are a kind of chrysanthemum and since there are edible chrysanthemums that are quite palatable, what her friend told her must be incorrect.

Which one of the following has a flawed pattern of reasoning most like that in Martha’s reasoning?

What Martha suspects about her friend's claim may be or may not be correct.
According to the excerpt, Some types of daisies= kind of chrysanthemum + some edible chrysanthemum= palatable
So, Martha concludes that some daisies  must be   palatable. This assertion may or may not be correct but the sentence uses "must" which expresses certainty. So, the flaw in reasoning is equating something which is possible to be definitely present.

(A) Jeanne is a member of the city chorus, and the city chorus is renowned. So Jeanne is an excellent singer.

(B) Rolfe belongs to the library reading group, and all members of that group are avid readers. So Rolfe is an avid reader.  Incorrect

(C) Some of Noriko’s sisters are on the debate team, and some members of the debate team are poor students. So at least one of Noriko’s sisters  must be  a poor student.   Correct

(D) Most of Leo’s friends are good swimmers, and quite strong. So it is likely that at least some of Leon’s friends are quite strong.

(E) Many of Teresa’s colleagues have written books. Most of the books they have written are on good writing. So some of Teresa’s colleagues are good writers.

rahat16 · Answer

The argument rests on following understanding : X is a type of Y ; since some Y's are palatable --> there must be atleast one variety of X which is palatable.
So C is inline with this reasoning and is correct

unraveled · Answer

Martha’s friend, who is very knowledgeable about edible flowers, told Martha that there are no edible daisies, at least not any that are palatable. Martha, however, reasons that since there are daisies that are a kind of chrysanthemum and since there are edible chrysanthemums that are quite palatable, what her friend told her must be incorrect.

Which one of the following has a flawed pattern of reasoning most like that in Martha’s reasoning?

(A) Jeanne is a member of the city chorus, and the city chorus is renowned.  So Jeanne is an excellent singer . - WRONG. Simple plain wrong logic. Also, not similar to passage's.

(B) Rolfe belongs to the library reading group, and all members of that group are avid readers.  So Rolfe is an avid reader.  - WRONG. Like A only.

(C) Some of Noriko’s sisters are on the debate team, and some members of the debate team are poor students. So  at least one of Noriko’s sisters must be a poor student . - CORRECT. One set is debate team and another is poor student. Both are clubbed and concluded which may not be necessarily true.

(D) Most of Leo’s friends are good swimmers, and quite strong. So  it is likely that at least some of Leon’s friends are quite strong . - WRONG. This looks okay in logic that it applies.

(E) Many of Teresa’s colleagues have written books. Most of the books they have written are on good writing.  So some of Teresa’s colleagues are good writers . - WORNG. Seems a good reasoning.

In the passage the reasoning is wrong since it makes a conclusion on a set that has set overlapping it partially/fully, however, it is based on logic of different set.

Answer C.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot:

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

This post was generated automatically.

Marthas friend, who is very knowledgeable about edible flowers, told

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

Marthas friend, who is very knowledgeable about edible flowers, told

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