GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 20 Aug 2019, 20:21

### 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

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# V11-25

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Current Student
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 4263
Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)

### Show Tags

04 Jan 2016, 10:49
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

31% (01:44) correct 69% (02:14) wrong based on 36 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Researchers claim that analogical thinking causes scientific discoveries. They used the works of famous scientists in an attempt to prove that analogy brings about creativity and thereby changes in knowledge. They continued to argue that distant analogies those scientists used could develop a new framework in a certain domain or even form a new domain - the more distant the analogies, the more creative the outcomes.
Which of the following statements, if true, makes the first claim made by the researchers vulnerable to criticism?

A. Creativity is a particular sort of response that brings together apparently irrelevant or remote ideas, leading to scientific discoveries.
B. Highly creative people sometimes use analogy methods to solve problems.
C. Analogical interpretations play a key role in arriving at many scientific empirical formulae.
D. Analogy items are frequently used in IQ tests to measure analytical ability of a person.
E. Analytical ability is a more important factor in scientific discoveries than creativity.

_________________
Current Student
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 4263
Location: India
GMAT 1: 760 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.8
WE: Marketing (Non-Profit and Government)

### Show Tags

04 Jan 2016, 10:49
Official Solution:

Researchers claim that analogical thinking causes scientific discoveries. They used the works of famous scientists in an attempt to prove that analogy brings about creativity and thereby changes in knowledge. They continued to argue that distant analogies those scientists used could develop a new framework in a certain domain or even form a new domain - the more distant the analogies, the more creative the outcomes.
Which of the following statements, if true, makes the first claim made by the researchers vulnerable to criticism?

A. Creativity is a particular sort of response that brings together apparently irrelevant or remote ideas, leading to scientific discoveries.
B. Highly creative people sometimes use analogy methods to solve problems.
C. Analogical interpretations play a key role in arriving at many scientific empirical formulae.
D. Analogy items are frequently used in IQ tests to measure analytical ability of a person.
E. Analytical ability is a more important factor in scientific discoveries than creativity.

A. Bringing together apparently irrelevant or remote ideas is what analogical thinking is. Statement A just implies that creativity is equivalent to analogical thinking and therefore does not oppose the argument.

B. Correct. The point of the argument is that analogical thinking brings about creativity which in turns results in scientific discoveries. However, Statement B implies that creativity brings about analogical thinking and not the other way round and therefore weakens the claim of the researchers.

C. This statement supports the argument, implying that analogical thinking causes derivation of many scientific empirical formulae.

D. This statement attempts to establish a correlation between IQ and analogy. However the point is to compare creativity with analogical thinking - out of context.

E. This statement presents a relation between creativity and analytical ability. However the point is to compare creativity with analogical thinking - out of context.

_________________
Current Student
Joined: 18 Sep 2015
Posts: 72
GMAT 1: 610 Q43 V31
GMAT 2: 610 Q47 V27
GMAT 3: 650 Q48 V31
GMAT 4: 700 Q49 V35
WE: Project Management (Health Care)

### Show Tags

12 Apr 2016, 05:22
3
I do not agree with this solution.
Answer choice b does not imply cuasality, but rather an instance of correlation.
hence answer choice b cannot weaken the relationship of (creativity) -> (changes in knowledge) [ and thus -> (scientific discoveries)].
Intern
Joined: 22 Apr 2016
Posts: 6
Schools: AGSM '15

### Show Tags

12 Jul 2016, 00:51
1
I think it's the option E
Analytical ability is a more important factor in scientific discoveries than creativity

It states that there is a more important factor than creativity which requires Analogical thinking. Thus undermining the statement that analogical thinking is the cause of discoveries, as analytical skill is the main cause. Analogical thinking can be a by-product as such

B states that Creative people use analogical thinking thus strengthening the argument that the method of analogical thinking is helpful in creativity and hence scientific discoveries
Retired Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2866
Location: Germany
Schools: German MBA
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)

### Show Tags

12 Jul 2016, 20:04
1
vipinmenon93 wrote:
I think it's the option E
Analytical ability is a more important factor in scientific discoveries than creativity

It states that there is a more important factor than creativity which requires Analogical thinking. Thus undermining the statement that analogical thinking is the cause of discoveries, as analytical skill is the main cause. Analogical thinking can be a by-product as such

B states that Creative people use analogical thinking thus strengthening the argument that the method of analogical thinking is helpful in creativity and hence scientific discoveries

The claim is as follows:

Analogical thinking ---->creativity-------------> discoveries. (first and second sentence of theh passage)

Now focus on the first part of this cause and effect chain - Analogical thinking ---->creativity. The claim is that analogical thinking brings about creativity.

However option B states the following:

Creativitiy------> analogical thinking----------> discoveries.

Again focus on the first part of this cause and effect chain - Creativitiy------> analogical thinking. Highly creative people uses analogy, i.e. analogy is not the cause of creativity, but the reasoning is the other way round - creativity causes analogical thinking.

One frequently used trap in GMAT for weakening question is as follows:
A and B occurs together. Conclusion A causes B.
Weakening statement: B causes A.

Here A = Analogical thinking
B = creativity.

Now coming to option E:

"It states that there is a more important factor than creativity which requires Analogical thinking." - this statement of yours is not correct. There is no mention of "analogical thinking" in option E and hence nothing can be concluded about the relation between analogical thinking, creativity and discovery. A totally different aspect (analytical thinking) is discussed in this option, which does not have any bearing to the first claim.
Intern
Joined: 31 Jul 2015
Posts: 29
Location: India

### Show Tags

21 Jul 2016, 11:56
1
This is kind of confusing question.
The option B creates a confusion by saying that "Highly creative people sometimes use analogy methods to solve problems. "
The reason it creates a confusion is because the argument says "Researchers claim that analogical thinking causes scientific discoveries". It does not say that only analogical thinking can cause scientific discoveries. So, there is a possibility that some other thing may cause scientiic discovery and not analogical thinking.

Option A is says quite the same but in different way. It says that, " Creativity is a particular sort of response that brings together apparently irrelevant or remote ideas, leading to scientific discoveries. "
So creativity brings --> irrelevant or remote ideas --> that leads to scientific discoveries.
So this also says the same thing as option A. However this option does not introduce any confusion by introducing a "sometimes" as in option B.
This is why I choose option A and not B.
Can someone explain this to me , if I am wrong.
_________________
Never give up !
Retired Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2866
Location: Germany
Schools: German MBA
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)

### Show Tags

21 Jul 2016, 13:24
urhowig wrote:
This is kind of confusing question.
The option B creates a confusion by saying that "Highly creative people sometimes use analogy methods to solve problems. "
The reason it creates a confusion is because the argument says "Researchers claim that analogical thinking causes scientific discoveries". It does not say that only analogical thinking can cause scientific discoveries. So, there is a possibility that some other thing may cause scientiic discovery and not analogical thinking.

Option A is says quite the same but in different way. It says that, " Creativity is a particular sort of response that brings together apparently irrelevant or remote ideas, leading to scientific discoveries. "
So creativity brings --> irrelevant or remote ideas --> that leads to scientific discoveries.
So this also says the same thing as option A. However this option does not introduce any confusion by introducing a "sometimes" as in option B.
This is why I choose option A and not B.
Can someone explain this to me , if I am wrong.

You have slightly deviated from what is given in option A.
"So creativity brings --> irrelevant or remote ideas --> that leads to scientific discoveries."

The first arrow is not a causal relation, it is an equality relation as per A.

creativity = analogical thinking -----> scientific discovery.

Option A states "Creativity IS a particular sort of response that brings together apparently irrelevant or remote ideas". Thus this statement does not oppose the first claim. i.e. option A does not establish that Creativity------> analogical thinking----------> discoveries. It just states that creativity and analogical thinking are the same thing.

The word sometimes is added in option B in order to hint that creative people does not ALWAYS use analytical thinking to solve problems. The creative people may sometimes solve problems using some other method than analogical thinking. Thus the use of sometimes further augments that creativity is more fundamental than analogical thinking. Therefore using sometimes further weakens the claim.
Intern
Joined: 31 Jul 2015
Posts: 29
Location: India

### Show Tags

21 Jul 2016, 18:14
sayantanc2k wrote:
urhowig wrote:
This is kind of confusing question.
The option B creates a confusion by saying that "Highly creative people sometimes use analogy methods to solve problems. "
The reason it creates a confusion is because the argument says "Researchers claim that analogical thinking causes scientific discoveries". It does not say that only analogical thinking can cause scientific discoveries. So, there is a possibility that some other thing may cause scientiic discovery and not analogical thinking.

Option A is says quite the same but in different way. It says that, " Creativity is a particular sort of response that brings together apparently irrelevant or remote ideas, leading to scientific discoveries. "
So creativity brings --> irrelevant or remote ideas --> that leads to scientific discoveries.
So this also says the same thing as option A. However this option does not introduce any confusion by introducing a "sometimes" as in option B.
This is why I choose option A and not B.
Can someone explain this to me , if I am wrong.

You have slightly deviated from what is given in option A.
"So creativity brings --> irrelevant or remote ideas --> that leads to scientific discoveries."

The first arrow is not a causal relation, it is an equality relation as per A.

creativity = analogical thinking -----> scientific discovery.

Option A states "Creativity IS a particular sort of response that brings together apparently irrelevant or remote ideas". Thus this statement does not oppose the first claim. i.e. option A does not establish that Creativity------> analogical thinking----------> discoveries. It just states that creativity and analogical thinking are the same thing.

The word sometimes is added in option B in order to hint that creative people does not ALWAYS use analytical thinking to solve problems. The creative people may sometimes solve problems using some other method than analogical thinking. Thus the use of sometimes further augments that creativity is more fundamental than analogical thinking. Therefore using sometimes further weakens the claim.

Hi ,
Thank you for your quick response. Your quick responses are helping me to go into the right track.
However, I am still not convinced with the causality creativity brings --> irrelevant or remote ideas --> that leads to scientific discoveries.
The last part of the sentence says that this finally leads to scientific discoveries. So how you are interpreting this ?

Second, you mentioned creative people does not ALWAYS use analytical thinking to solve problems.. This absolutely true for option B. However I think this does not weaken the argument , as this is quite possible. The argument as you can see says Researchers claim that analogical thinking causes scientific discoveries. This means something else can also cause scientific discoveries.
Say for example , Acid turns milk into curd.
Does this mean that apart form acid nothing else can not turn milk into curd ? I think no.
So these are my queries.

Thank you

Soham
_________________
Never give up !
Retired Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2866
Location: Germany
Schools: German MBA
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)

### Show Tags

22 Jul 2016, 09:55
urhowig wrote:
sayantanc2k wrote:
urhowig wrote:
This is kind of confusing question.
The option B creates a confusion by saying that "Highly creative people sometimes use analogy methods to solve problems. "
The reason it creates a confusion is because the argument says "Researchers claim that analogical thinking causes scientific discoveries". It does not say that only analogical thinking can cause scientific discoveries. So, there is a possibility that some other thing may cause scientiic discovery and not analogical thinking.

Option A is says quite the same but in different way. It says that, " Creativity is a particular sort of response that brings together apparently irrelevant or remote ideas, leading to scientific discoveries. "
So creativity brings --> irrelevant or remote ideas --> that leads to scientific discoveries.
So this also says the same thing as option A. However this option does not introduce any confusion by introducing a "sometimes" as in option B.
This is why I choose option A and not B.
Can someone explain this to me , if I am wrong.

You have slightly deviated from what is given in option A.
"So creativity brings --> irrelevant or remote ideas --> that leads to scientific discoveries."

The first arrow is not a causal relation, it is an equality relation as per A.

creativity = analogical thinking -----> scientific discovery.

Option A states "Creativity IS a particular sort of response that brings together apparently irrelevant or remote ideas". Thus this statement does not oppose the first claim. i.e. option A does not establish that Creativity------> analogical thinking----------> discoveries. It just states that creativity and analogical thinking are the same thing.

The word sometimes is added in option B in order to hint that creative people does not ALWAYS use analytical thinking to solve problems. The creative people may sometimes solve problems using some other method than analogical thinking. Thus the use of sometimes further augments that creativity is more fundamental than analogical thinking. Therefore using sometimes further weakens the claim.

Hi ,
Thank you for your quick response. Your quick responses are helping me to go into the right track.
However, I am still not convinced with the causality creativity brings --> irrelevant or remote ideas --> that leads to scientific discoveries.
The last part of the sentence says that this finally leads to scientific discoveries. So how you are interpreting this ?

Second, you mentioned creative people does not ALWAYS use analytical thinking to solve problems.. This absolutely true for option B. However I think this does not weaken the argument , as this is quite possible. The argument as you can see says Researchers claim that analogical thinking causes scientific discoveries. This means something else can also cause scientific discoveries.
Say for example , Acid turns milk into curd.
Does this mean that apart form acid nothing else can not turn milk into curd ? I think no.
So these are my queries.

Thank you

Soham

The issue here is whether creativity causes analogical thinking or vice versa. ( In either case scientific discovery happens at the end).

The passage (first claim) suggests that analogical---> creativity (----> discovery).. the part within bracket is not the point, but he green font part is.

In order to weaken the argument, we shall need an option that indicates: creativity ---> analogical thinking.

Option B does that: "Highly creative people sometimes use analogy methods",i.e. creativity ---> analogical thinking.

Option A just states creativity = analogical thinking.

Moreover adding sometimes in group B further weakens, because then the implication is:
Sometimes: creativity ---> analogical thinking----> discovery
Other times: creativity----> something else ----> discovery.

So option B weakens further stating that analogical thinking is not fundamental, but creative thinking is.

(Consider the case:
Back ground: We kept milk on the table. After some time we see that it turned into curd.
Premise: Acid turns milk into curd
Conclusion: someone poured acid in the milk
Weakening Statement: something else turns milk into curd. )
Intern
Joined: 25 Jan 2015
Posts: 18

### Show Tags

16 Feb 2017, 23:58
Creativity is a particular sort of response that brings together apparently irrelevant or remote ideas, leading to scientific discoveries.

I agree with urhowig. How can one say option A does not imply causality? This is how I interpret option A: Creativity is a response to something that brings remote ideas together. Meaning: If you think of a remote idea then it is the creativity that brings together the analogy "to develop a new framework in a certain domain or even form a new domain"

So it is creativity -> analogy -> scientific discoveries or may be one can say creativity + analogy -> scientific discoveries which also weakens the argument
not creativity = ananlogy ->scientific discoveries. What am I am missing?
Retired Moderator
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2866
Location: Germany
Schools: German MBA
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)

### Show Tags

18 Feb 2017, 04:38
Shiridip wrote:
Creativity is a particular sort of response that brings together apparently irrelevant or remote ideas, leading to scientific discoveries.

I agree with urhowig. How can one say option A does not imply causality? This is how I interpret option A: Creativity is a response to something that brings remote ideas together. Meaning: If you think of a remote idea then it is the creativity that brings together the analogy "to develop a new framework in a certain domain or even form a new domain"

So it is creativity -> analogy -> scientific discoveries or may be one can say creativity + analogy -> scientific discoveries which also weakens the argument
not creativity = ananlogy ->scientific discoveries. What am I am missing?

https://gmatclub.com/forum/v11-211376.html#p1712889
and here:
https://gmatclub.com/forum/v11-211376.html#p1713222

In case you do not agree with the explanations, you need to be specific exactly which part of the explanation is not agreeable to you, preferably quoting the part. Otherwise it would not be effective taking on the discussion further because we would be revolving around the same area time and again without reaching a satisfactory answer.
Director
Joined: 14 Feb 2017
Posts: 933
Location: Australia
Concentration: Technology, Strategy
Schools: LBS '22
GMAT 1: 560 Q41 V26
GMAT 2: 550 Q43 V23
GMAT 3: 650 Q47 V33
GMAT 4: 650 Q44 V36
WE: Management Consulting (Consulting)

### Show Tags

05 Aug 2019, 17:46
I don't agree with this solution either.

I can't see how B does what you say it does. We would need to assume that scientists solve problems which is false given the context of the passage implies scientists make discoveries.

Rubbish.
_________________
Goal: Q49, V41

+1 Kudos if you like my post pls!
Re: V11-25   [#permalink] 05 Aug 2019, 17:46
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# V11-25

Moderators: chetan2u, Bunuel