Seeing is much more complicated than most people realize. In

Question

Seeing is much more complicated than most people realize. In this age of video, films, and television it is tempting to think of vision as just another way to make a picture. Recent findings suggest that the visual signals that are picked up by the eye are not processed by a single strand of nerves but are actually fed into three distinct processing systems within the brain: one system processes the shape of what is seen, another its color, and the third its location or movement. As more is known of how the eye processes the massive amount of information that it typically takes in, we may even be able to duplicate the experience of sight in ways that are superior to film, television, and photography in the near future.

The statements above, if true, most strongly support which of the following?

The new technology has given us the ability to truly appreciate what the human eye is capable of.

No video system or computerized camera currently available can match the ability of the human visual system to make sense of an infinite variety of images.

Developments in visual technology can be compared favorably with recent findings undertaken by experts in the physical sciences.

The multiple-strand processing systems of the eye allows the human brain to “visualize” what a camera cannot.

Cameras and vision have complementary features.

tenaman10 · Answer

B ..
following statement is the key ..
 As more is known of how the eye processes the massive amount of ..........

ulm · Answer

No video system or computerized camera currently available can match the ability of the human visual system to make sense of an infinite variety of images. (B)

If we look to the last sentence, we would find "able to duplicate the experience of sight in ways that are superior to film, television, and photography in the near future" that means that nowadays human seeing is more advanced than any digital analog.

amit2k9 · Answer

From the argument possible assumptions can be - no equipment exist currently that can match up the complexity of the eye.
 technology will be able to replicate the existing complex mechanism of eye.

The first assumption can be found in option B.Also, if you negate the option B, it will undermine the argument.

Hence a sure shot answer.

sumitjain · Answer

I drilled down to option B and D. As both of them has some related info similar to arg: "the ability of the human visual system to make sense of an infinite variety of images" or "multiple-strand processing systems of the eye".

In choice D, The multiple-strand processing systems of the eye allows the human brain to “visualize” what a camera cannot. - which is very bold statement "camera cannot" - we never know, it could be in future.

In choice B, No video system or computerized  camera currently available can match  the ability of the human visual system to make sense of an infinite variety of images.

So, B.

USCTrojan2006 · Answer

+1 B.

However, this question doesn't seem like a true strengthen question, but more of an inference.

ravish · Answer

How is B the correct answer ?

Excerpt from the passage:

As more is known of how the eye processes the massive amount of information that it typically takes in, we  may even be able to  duplicate the experience of sight in ways that are superior to film, television, and photography in the near future.

If we MAY be able to , how can B which states No video system or computerized camera  currently available  can match the ability of the human visual system to make sense of an infinite variety of images be correct?

if anything, the passage hints that currently, film is superior to vision and in the future, with the current breakthroughs regarding the complexity of vision, that vision MAY be able to surpass the experience of sight that is generated by cameras.

Naina1 · Answer

Can someone please explain why D is wrong?

dominicraj · Answer

Hi, Option D does not mention anything about if the camera it refers to is from the present or the future. Option B rightly suggests that " no camera currently available is comparable "which matches with the conclusion " we may..in future" Hope this helps. :-D

Regards, Dom.

kzivrev · Answer

First I think that this question is a INFERENCE/CONCLUSION type of a question. WHy? because it says the statements above, IF TRUE( the statements above) which means that the statements above are used to support WHICH OF TEH FOLLOWING ( the conclusions below) we need to take the statement above as true and to infere what they support.

So this I wont consider as strengthen question but as a inference.

On that line I Think that the correct answer should be something between B and D but both are not complete statements to support the statements. there is issue with MAY, CAN, CANONT...
What si the source of this question?

pri.07.23 · Answer

Conclusion question

Two key statements to keep an eye on are:
1)  In this age of video, films, and television it is tempting to think of vision as just another way to make a picture 
This statement actually tells that current tech we tend to undermine the capability of human vision system. the line next to it supports this claim.

2)  As more is known of how the eye processes the massive amount of information that it typically takes in, we may even be able to duplicate the experience of sight in ways that are superior to film, television, and photography in the near future .
This statement says that there is still scope for improvement in tech to come somewhat closer to actual mechanism of how our eyes operate. And that this improved tech will be superior than the current tech available for producing vision such as TV, Films etc.

These two statement lead to the conclusion that  
No video system or computerized camera currently available can match the ability of the human visual system to make sense of an infinite variety of images.

NOTE: this is the best option available out of all AC's.

(D) The multiple-strand processing systems of the eye allows the human brain to “visualize” what a camera cannot 
The argument never compares what camera can do and can't do. It only compares that current tech is somewhat inferior w.r.t capabilities of human eye. It never says that a CAMERA can't visualize what an human eye does. This is validated by the fact that current tech is being used to replicate human vision, but is still far away from the true capabilities of human eye.

hdwnkr · Answer

This is more of a Derive the conclusion question type.

Eyes are complicated. There are three systems that work rather than plain old seeing concept. There is a lot more that is yet to be discovered. And the new discoveries could redefine technology, make them what they aren't yet.

Hence, B

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.

Seeing is much more complicated than most people realize. In

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

Seeing is much more complicated than most people realize. In

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