Advertisement: Each of the Economic Merit Prize winners from

Question

Advertisement: Each of the Economic Merit Prize winners from the past 25 years is covered by the Acme retirement plan. Since the winners of the nation’s most prestigious award for economists have thus clearly recognized that the Acme plan offers them a ﬁnancially secure future, it is probably a good plan for anyone with retirement needs similar to theirs.

The advertisement’s argumentation is most vulnerable to criticism on which one of the following grounds?

(A) It ignores the possibility that the majority of Economic Merit Prize winners from previous years used a retirement plan other than the Acme plan.
(B) It fails to address adequately the possibility that any of several retirement plans would be good enough for, and offer a ﬁnancially secure future to, Economic Merit Prize winners.
(C) It appeals to the fact that supposed experts have endorsed the argument’s main conclusion, rather than appealing to direct evidence for that conclusion.
(D) It takes for granted that some winners of the Economic Merit Prize have deliberately selected the Acme retirement plan, rather than having had it chosen for them by their employers.
(E) It presumes, without providing justiﬁcation, that each of the Economic Merit Prize winners has retirement plan needs that are identical to the advertisement’s intended audience’s retirement plan needs.

Why is E) wrong?

mikemcgarry · Accepted Answer

I am responding to a pm from Voodoochild . First of all, as piyatiwari so eloquently pointed out --- if the argument specifies " a good plan for anyone with retirement needs similar to theirs ", then they explicitly are considering the issue of differing retirement needs. In other words, they are not presuming anything along those lines. Furthermore, beware of extreme language, which is always always always wrong on the GMAT. The phrase "similar retirement needs" -- that's balanced and sensible. The phrase "identical retirement needs" --- that's fanatically extreme. Consider any broad categories of people's lives --- their marriages, their relationship with children, their relationship with career, their relationship with religion, etc. etc. --- for any of these, we could reasonably say that the experience of this person and that person were "similar", but to say that two unrelated people had "identical" experience of marriage or family or something --- that's simply crazy. Right there, extreme = wrong. Finally, in real world terms, there is something particularly bizarre and so completely unrealistic about the whole concept of "identical retirement needs" --- that is a phrase that, in and of itself, trumpets its own unabashed absurdity. Most people choosing a retirement account are decades away from actually retiring --- a typical person in her 30s has no idea what her needs will be by the time she is in her late 60s. If we look at two people of reasonably similar health and age, both in their 30s --- there's no way we could guarantee right now that their "retirement needs" three decades from now will be anywhere close to the same. No one can say what injuries, what diseases, what conditions, or what disabilities might occur. Some people, healthy all their lives, hit difficult health problems in their 50s, or in their 60s, or in their 70s, or much later, and it's very hard to tell, when a person is in his 30s, how all that will play out. The whole idea of two people, both in their 30s, having "identical retirement needs" --- pure fantasy, pure nonsense. It's true, if we are talking about customers in their 50s, they will have a somewhat better idea what to expect, but even in the 15 years between starting the plan and retiring, anything could happen. Folks might be on an ostensibly similar trajectory, but it is nothing short of folly to imagine that we could say two people have "identical" retirement needs. That's what leaps out at me when I read (E). Does all this make sense? Mike :-)

piyatiwari · Answer

E is wrong because it contradicts information in given argument.

(E) It presumes, without providing justiﬁcation, that each of the Economic Merit Prize winners has retirement plan needs that are identical to the advertisement’s intended audience’s retirement plan needs.

argument : it is probably a good plan for anyone  with retirement needs similar to theirs .

anukrati · Answer

Whenever there are questions that A causes B. or If A is true, then B is true.
Then the easy way to identify the incorrect choices that
If C is true, then B is true.
That means, 
you should try to show that there is some other reason because of which they are secured with Acme Plan.
This is correctly depicted in Option D.
In Option D, it is trying to show that the economists did not choose the plan on their own but their employers. So the argument given by the advertiser falls.

In E, it is trying to attack the needs.

Assumption behind the argument is :
1) The best economists chose the plan on their own.
So our answer should be whichever option contradict this assumption.

In E, we are not attacking the assumption but the premise. The premise is always thought to be correct.

Hope this helps!!!!

somil0912 · Answer

Hello  mikemcgarry ,

Excellent explanation given by you. You said that extreme language is always wrong on GMAT. Can you give 2-3 examples so that I can keep in mind what all comes under 'extreme'.

Thanks,
Somil

mikemcgarry · Answer

Dear Somil, My friend, this is tricky --- it's not so much the words used, but the meaning. Remember that, ultimately, the GMAT SC is a test of meaning . By extreme language, I mean any wording that implies an all-or-nothing conclusion. Reasonable : Most teachers care about their students . Extreme : Every teacher has tremendous care for her students . Reasonable : Most judges in this county know the law well . Extreme : All the judges in this county are experts in the law . Reasonable : McPhee's department store tends to have low prices on items . Extreme : One could not possibly find a lower price for any item than the price charged at McPhee's department store . Does this make sense? Mike :-)

somil0912 · Answer

Thanks  mikemcgarry . It does make sense. I will only be able to further understand it by applying while solving the questions.

Thanks,
Somil

shreygupta3192 · Answer

why can`t it be option B..
It fails to address adequately the possibility that any of several retirement plans would be good enough for, and offer a ﬁnancially secure future to, Economic Merit Prize winners.

Since any of the plans will be good for empw, including the acme, there is a possibility that it may not be a good plan for others(as like any other plan,this plan will suit empw but may not suit others),,hence a criticsm..

plz explain.

Spovil · Answer

D is the correct answer

Conclusion:  it (Acme retirement plan) is probably a good plan for anyone with retirement needs similar to theirs
 Intermediate conclusion:  nation’s most prestigious award for economists have thus clearly recognized that the Acme plan offers them a ﬁnancially secure future
 Premise:  Each of the Economic Merit Prize winners from the past 25 years is covered by the Acme retirement plan

Now, if we focus on premise and IC, we will see that,there is a huge logic jump. As the economic merit prize winners have been bestowed with a retirement plan, the plan has been recognized!! And recognized can be re worded as something, that has been supported...D covers this gap..so is the right answer

danbrown9445 · Answer

I was stuck between C and D.
Reason C is wrong - 
(C) It appeals to the fact that supposed  experts have endorsed  the argument’s main conclusion, rather than appealing to direct evidence for that conclusion.
Bolded potion is an assumption.If the experts did not choose the plan themselves,then this assumption is not true.Reject (C).

DmitryFarberMPrep · Answer

danbrown9445 
Also, selecting something is not the same as endorsing it. For instance, I buy plenty of products that I wouldn't actually tell others to buy. We'd only have an endorsement if these prize winners actually stated publicly that we should use the plan.

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.

Advertisement: Each of the Economic Merit Prize winners from

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

Advertisement: Each of the Economic Merit Prize winners from

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