Events & Promotions
| Last visit was: 27 Sep 2026, 07:11 |
It is currently 27 Sep 2026, 07:11 |
|
|
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.
Sep 2701:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Sep 2807:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Boost your GMAT score in less than one month in a live online class + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Mon, Tues, Wed, Thur, Fri Sept. 28, 2026 - Oct. 16, 2027, 7:00pm-10:00pm EST
Sep 2911:00 AM EDT
-01:00 PM EDT
" Description: Top scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Tues/Thur Sept. 29, 2026 - Dec. 3, 2026, 11:00am-1:00pm EST
Oct 0102:00 AM EDT
-03:00 AM EDT
Tejas studied hard but kept repeating the same mistakes. After 3 attempts at 645, a focused 4-week strategy helped him identify and fix what was holding him back—leading to a 695 with just 12–15 hours of study per week.
Oct 0107:00 AM BST
-08:00 AM GMT
Welcome to the GMAT Club's Free Interview Prep Event for Top MBA Programs! Buy tickets - Virtual series that’s all set to equip you to -excel in your MBA interviews.
Oct 0301:00 PM EDT
-04:00 PM EDT
Top scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Saturdays Oct. 3, 2026 - Dec. 26, 2026, 1:00pm-4:00pm EST
30 Jun 2025, 09:17
Kudos
Bookmarks
The civil engineer's reasoning is that the stagnation in trade between the northern and southern cities is due to a lack of reliable transportation methods, and therefore, building a freeway system within five miles of each city is necessary to spur economic growth.
Option B weakens this reasoning most seriously because it indicates that there are other, more important causes for the lack of trade beyond transportation issues. If factors such as economic disparities, regulatory barriers, or lack of demand are more significant, then building the freeway might not effectively increase trade, even if it addresses transportation reliability. This undermines the engineer's assumption that improving transportation alone will spur economic growth.
Option A weakens the specific requirement that the freeway must be within five miles but does not challenge the need for a freeway itself. It suggests that a less stringent (and potentially less costly) freeway could suffice, but the core idea that a freeway is necessary remains intact.
Option C addresses budgetary constraints, which is a practical concern but does not directly challenge the logical reasoning that the freeway is necessary for growth.
Option D strengthens the engineer's argument by emphasizing the importance of proximity between transportation systems and cities, supporting the need for a close freeway.
Option E suggests that existing transportation methods can be improved without building a new freeway, providing an alternative solution. However, the phrase "to some extent" is vague and may not fully address the reliability issue, so it does not weaken the reasoning as effectively as option B.
Thus, option B most seriously weakens the argument by questioning the causal link between transportation reliability and trade growth, implying that the proposed freeway might not achieve the desired economic benefits.
Option B weakens this reasoning most seriously because it indicates that there are other, more important causes for the lack of trade beyond transportation issues. If factors such as economic disparities, regulatory barriers, or lack of demand are more significant, then building the freeway might not effectively increase trade, even if it addresses transportation reliability. This undermines the engineer's assumption that improving transportation alone will spur economic growth.
Option A weakens the specific requirement that the freeway must be within five miles but does not challenge the need for a freeway itself. It suggests that a less stringent (and potentially less costly) freeway could suffice, but the core idea that a freeway is necessary remains intact.
Option C addresses budgetary constraints, which is a practical concern but does not directly challenge the logical reasoning that the freeway is necessary for growth.
Option D strengthens the engineer's argument by emphasizing the importance of proximity between transportation systems and cities, supporting the need for a close freeway.
Option E suggests that existing transportation methods can be improved without building a new freeway, providing an alternative solution. However, the phrase "to some extent" is vague and may not fully address the reliability issue, so it does not weaken the reasoning as effectively as option B.
Thus, option B most seriously weakens the argument by questioning the causal link between transportation reliability and trade growth, implying that the proposed freeway might not achieve the desired economic benefits.
30 Jun 2025, 09:19
Kudos
Bookmarks
argument :
Trade between the northern and southern cities of our state has stagnated greatly
conclusion : There are few reliable methods of transporting goods between these two groups of cities, so in order to spur economic growth in this state, we must build a freeway system, connecting the two groups of cities, that passes no more than five miles away from each city.
most seriously weakens the civil engineer’s reasoning
A. Building a freeway system that passes as much as ten miles from each city would be sufficient to greatly increase trade between the northern and southern cities of the state. ; does not support the conclusion nor does weaken it
B. There are other, more important causes for the lack of trade between the northern and southern cities of the state in addition to a lack of reliable methods of transporting goods between these two groups of cities.; this option does weaken conclusion but not wholly
C. The state’s infrastructure budget is not currently large enough to finance the construction of a freeway system.; there is no info about budget here ..
D. Growth in the commercial traffic between two groups of cities is most often associated with the closeness of the transportation system with the cities. this strengthens the argument
E. The reliability of existing methods of transporting goods between the northern and southern cities of the state can be improved to some extent without building a freeway system ; option gives reasoning which seems to most seriously weaken the conclusion
OPTION E
Trade between the northern and southern cities of our state has stagnated greatly
conclusion : There are few reliable methods of transporting goods between these two groups of cities, so in order to spur economic growth in this state, we must build a freeway system, connecting the two groups of cities, that passes no more than five miles away from each city.
most seriously weakens the civil engineer’s reasoning
A. Building a freeway system that passes as much as ten miles from each city would be sufficient to greatly increase trade between the northern and southern cities of the state. ; does not support the conclusion nor does weaken it
B. There are other, more important causes for the lack of trade between the northern and southern cities of the state in addition to a lack of reliable methods of transporting goods between these two groups of cities.; this option does weaken conclusion but not wholly
C. The state’s infrastructure budget is not currently large enough to finance the construction of a freeway system.; there is no info about budget here ..
D. Growth in the commercial traffic between two groups of cities is most often associated with the closeness of the transportation system with the cities. this strengthens the argument
E. The reliability of existing methods of transporting goods between the northern and southern cities of the state can be improved to some extent without building a freeway system ; option gives reasoning which seems to most seriously weaken the conclusion
OPTION E
Bunuel
30 Jun 2025, 09:19
Kudos
Bookmarks
Information given:
- Trade between northern & southern cities has stagnated
- Few reliable ways exist to transport goods between them
- Conclusion: to spur economic growth, a freeway must be built that passes no more than five miles from each city
Question:
- Which option, if true, most seriously weakens the civil engineer's reasoning
Solution:
- A: A freeway ten miles from each city would be sufficient to increase trade
- Granted, this option shows that the five-mile limit may be unnecessarily strict
- However, the need to build a freeway remains
- Does not most seriously weaken civil engineer's reasoning
- B: Other, more important causes for lack of trade exist besides unreliable transport
- Directly attacks core assumptions: that building freeway will fix stagnant trade
- If transport isn't the real (or at least, the most important) cause, the plan won't work
- Strongly weakens civil engineer's reasoning
- C: The state's budget is too small to build the freeway
- This is about feasibility, not whether a freeway would solve the problem
- Does not most seriously weaken civil engineer's reasoning
- D: Growth in traffic is linked to how close transport is to the cities
- Supports the idea that proximity matters, supporting the conclusion
- Does not most seriously weaken civil engineer's reasoning
- E: Reliability of existing transport can be improved without a freeway
- Given that the reliability of existing methods can be improved to some extent without building a freeway system does not imply that no freeway is needed to spur economic growth
- Does not most seriously weaken civil engineer's reasoning
Answer: B, There are other, more important causes for the lack of trade between the northern and southern cities of the state in addition to a lack of reliable methods of transporting goods between these two groups of cities.
- Trade between northern & southern cities has stagnated
- Few reliable ways exist to transport goods between them
- Conclusion: to spur economic growth, a freeway must be built that passes no more than five miles from each city
Question:
- Which option, if true, most seriously weakens the civil engineer's reasoning
Solution:
- A: A freeway ten miles from each city would be sufficient to increase trade
- Granted, this option shows that the five-mile limit may be unnecessarily strict
- However, the need to build a freeway remains
- Does not most seriously weaken civil engineer's reasoning
- B: Other, more important causes for lack of trade exist besides unreliable transport
- Directly attacks core assumptions: that building freeway will fix stagnant trade
- If transport isn't the real (or at least, the most important) cause, the plan won't work
- Strongly weakens civil engineer's reasoning
- C: The state's budget is too small to build the freeway
- This is about feasibility, not whether a freeway would solve the problem
- Does not most seriously weaken civil engineer's reasoning
- D: Growth in traffic is linked to how close transport is to the cities
- Supports the idea that proximity matters, supporting the conclusion
- Does not most seriously weaken civil engineer's reasoning
- E: Reliability of existing transport can be improved without a freeway
- Given that the reliability of existing methods can be improved to some extent without building a freeway system does not imply that no freeway is needed to spur economic growth
- Does not most seriously weaken civil engineer's reasoning
Answer: B, There are other, more important causes for the lack of trade between the northern and southern cities of the state in addition to a lack of reliable methods of transporting goods between these two groups of cities.
Bunuel
30 Jun 2025, 09:21
Kudos
Bookmarks
I was confused between A and B.
A attacks the assumption that only a freeway passing 5 miles away can be constructed for economic growth.
B doesn't directly attack the reasoning of the engineer.Its vague and partially weakens.Other causes doesn't directly disapprove that a freeway could still help.
So A is the ans
A attacks the assumption that only a freeway passing 5 miles away can be constructed for economic growth.
B doesn't directly attack the reasoning of the engineer.Its vague and partially weakens.Other causes doesn't directly disapprove that a freeway could still help.
So A is the ans
Bunuel
