The number of children killed while playing illegally on

Question

The number of children killed while playing illegally on railway lines in Britain is now ten times as high as it was 10 years ago. We may therefore conclude that provision for children to play in a safe environment is insufficient and that lives are being lost as a result.
Which of the following exhibits the same logic as the statement above?

A) Minister X has stated in Parliament that his department is on course to achieve the budget cuts that were promised by the Prime Minister. However, Minister X has a reputation for misleading Parliament, so we should not necessarily believe his claim.

B) The incidence of lung cancer has decreased steadily over the last decade. The treatment of lung cancer victims represents a heavy financial burden on the National Health Service, so we may conclude that the costs of running the N.H.S. have decreased in the last ten years.

C) Thin, wispy clouds, known as cirrus are usually associated with fine, dry weather. Looking at the sky this morning, I noticed the presence of these clouds, so I conclude that it is likely that the weather today will be fine and dry.

D) Workers in the factory owned by company Y have expressed dissatisfaction with the inflexibility of their working schedules. The management are proposing to introduce more flexible working practices in the hope that doing so will increase worker satisfaction.

E) Since Peter started on his new training regime, his performance on the hundred metre hurdles has increased greatly. Clearly the new training regime is paying dividends and should be continued.

I am confused with the logic in the argument

. So, share some analysis for this problem.

Archived Topic

Hi there,

This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.

Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Critical Reasoning (CR) Forum

Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.

Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!

. So, share some analysis for this problem.

Indien · Answer

E
First evidence is presented, and then it is connected to an existing rule. A recommendation follows it.

well, I am not so good/comfortable with parallel reasoning. I wonder if CR bible would help. I am yet to cover that topic in the book.

sasen · Answer

B looks like a good choice. if B is the OA,i can explain

nsp007 · Answer

I think it's B..

sang5650 · Answer

I will go with B and here is how I do this CR type:

Given logic: 
Premise: No. of children killed in railway lines has increased 10 times.
Conclusion: Childrens safety is insufficient and lives are lost due to lack of safety.

The above can be restated as: 
One issue is noted.(effect)
Author mentions the cause of the effect. However there is no mention about fixing the issue.

A) Dept is to achieve budget cuts
X cannot be trusted . so outcome is uncertain. Uncertainity is not pointed in Argument. This is not even close to the logic presented above So elliminate.

B) states : " lung cancer decreased
The financial impact of issue was huge for NHS.
So cost for NHS reduced."
Author mentions the cause of the effect (lung cancer has decreased)
issue noted . (the financial burden was huge for NHS)
The conclusion is drawn based on these two stmt just like the argument does. Also there is no focus on the main problem which is dealing with the lung cancer. This shifts the focus from a more serious problem (lung cancer) to financial burden. This is exactly what the argument did. The more serious issue was child safety. The argument says child safety is insufficient and makes a conclusion without mentioning any solution for the problem.

C) No issue is described here. So elliminate

D) Issue noted.
A solution for the issue is proposed. The argument doesnot discuss a solution for the stated issue . so this is not parallel . elliminate.

E)A new program's outcome is positive for Peter and so should be continued. This is not parallel to the argument either. This is out of scope. When there is no solution discussed in argument how can a analysis of that solution parallel the argument. So elliminated.

nsp007 · Answer

nice explanation, sang5650 !!

Indien · Answer

Good explanation from sang5650. B sounds better now

ykaiim · Answer

The OA is E.

Evidence is presented at the start which is connected to a rule. Finally recommendation follows.

vannbj · Answer

Yeah I said E. B seemed like the boobie trap answer.

firang · Answer

someone please explain the logic here, I'm not getting how E is correct.

ankithakhu · Answer

E 
The number of children killed while playing illegally on railway lines in Britain is now ten times as high as it was 10 years ago. We may therefore conclude that provision for children to play in a safe environment is insufficient and that lives are being lost as a result.  (It is the insufficient provision for children to play in a safe environment leading to loss of children lives. The second statement is causing the first) Look for similar reasonings. 
Which of the following exhibits the same logic as the statement above?

B) The incidence of lung cancer has decreased steadily over the last decade. The treatment of lung cancer victims represents a heavy financial burden on the National Health Service, so we may conclude that the costs of running the N.H.S. have decreased in the last ten years.  (Not the same logic. First statement is causing the second statement and not the other way round) 
E) Since Peter started on his new training regime, his performance on the hundred metre hurdles has increased greatly. Clearly the new training regime is paying dividends and should be continued. (Same logic. It is the second statement, the (training regime) that is causing the first statement (increasing performance in hundred meter hurdle))

The number of children killed while playing illegally on

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