by: zitipiti
2 mins
by: NovaMath
13 mins
Events & Promotions
|
|
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 1507:00 PM EDT
-09:00 PM EST
Elite 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/Thurs Sept. 15, 2026 - Nov. 15, 2027, 7:00pm-9:00pm EST
Sep 2107:00 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. 21, 2026 - Oct. 9, 2027, 7:00pm-10:00pm EST
Nahid078
Joined: 29 Dec 2016
Last visit: 13 Feb 2017
Posts: 16
Location: Bangladesh
Concentration: Finance, Entrepreneurship
Schools: Babson '19 Carroll '19
GMAT 1: 550 Q47 V20
GPA: 3.2
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
95%
(hard)
Question Stats:
41% (01:51) correct
59%
(01:25)
wrong
based on 739
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
All intelligent people are nearsighted. I am very nearsighted. So I must be a genius.
Which one of the following exhibits both of the logical flaws exhibited in the argument above?
(A) I must be stupid because all intelligent people are nearsighted and I have perfect eyesight.
(B) All chickens have beaks. This bird has a beak. So this bird must be a chicken.
(C) All pigs have four legs, but this spider has eight legs. So this spider must be twice as big as any pig.
(D) John is extremely happy, so he must be extremely tall because all tall people are happy.
(E) All geniuses are very nearsighted. I must be very nearsighted since I am a genius.
Which one of the following exhibits both of the logical flaws exhibited in the argument above?
(A) I must be stupid because all intelligent people are nearsighted and I have perfect eyesight.
(B) All chickens have beaks. This bird has a beak. So this bird must be a chicken.
(C) All pigs have four legs, but this spider has eight legs. So this spider must be twice as big as any pig.
(D) John is extremely happy, so he must be extremely tall because all tall people are happy.
(E) All geniuses are very nearsighted. I must be very nearsighted since I am a genius.
sobby
Current Student
Joined: 14 Nov 2014
Last visit: 24 Jan 2022
Posts: 441
Location: India
Schools: Rotman '20 (S) Kelley '21 (S) (A)
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.76
Nahid078
In my opinion , it is B ...why D is preferred over B...
Posts: 4,849
sobby
You have to read the argument carefully.
let us break it down.
Premise 1: intelligent --> nearsighted.
Premise 2: very nearsighted
Conclusion: genius (very intelligent).
let us look at option D -
Premise 1: tall people --> happy.
Premise 2: extremely happy
Conclusion: extremely tall.
Note the modifiers "very" and "extremely".
B does not add these modifiers in premise 2 and the conclusion. hence, incorrect.
Option B is talking about something, which is NOUN, whereas option D is talking about quality, which is adjective. The prompt also talks about adjective.
So, it is D.
_________________
So, it is D.
_________________
Hasan Mahmud
Schools: Cambridge'16
Posts: 405
A causes B , so if B then A
Flaw: B has the only one cause
not any option fits the prephrased flaw ideally, only D assumes the same flaw
Flaw: B has the only one cause
not any option fits the prephrased flaw ideally, only D assumes the same flaw
I missed the word "very" before near sighted and ended up choosing B. Classic trap set for reading in hurry.
Posts: 16,392
Explanation
First, the stimulus takes the statement “All intelligent people are nearsighted” (“All X are Y” or “If X, then Y”) and tries to conclude something based on the consequent—i.e., on the Y term. So the first mistake the stimulus makes is to argue along the lines “All intelligent people are nearsighted; I am nearsighted, therefore I must be intelligent.” But the stimulus doesn’t stop there: it intensifies both terms, arguing that since I am very nearsighted, I must be very intelligent (a genius, in fact). There’s no grounds for connecting degree of nearsightedness to degree of intelligence, so that’s a second flaw. (D) shows the same pattern. Based on the statement “All tall people are happy” or “All X are Y,” (D) infers not simply that “Since John is happy, he must be tall” (or “Y, therefore X”) but goes the extra mile and concludes “Since John is extremely happy, he must be extremely tall.”
(A) takes the evidence, “All intelligent people are nearsighted” (All X are Y), and goes on to infer something from the negation of the consequent or the Y term: “I have perfect vision” (i.e. “I am NOT nearsighted” or NOT-Y), therefore I must be stupid” (i.e. “I am NOT intelligent” or NOT-X). Thus, although (A) does include the same intensification we find in the stimulus, the structure of the argument is different.
(B) follows the stimulus in reasoning “All X are Y; Y, therefore X” but misses the second flaw, that of intensifying the terms.
(C) is a mess; there’s nothing connecting the idea of the number of legs an animal has to its size, nothing relating pigs to spiders, and, in fact, nothing remotely similar to the stimulus.
(E) simply runs “All X are Y (All geniuses are very nearsighted); X (I am a genius), therefore Y (I must be very nearsighted). That’s valid and not parallel.
Answer: D
First, the stimulus takes the statement “All intelligent people are nearsighted” (“All X are Y” or “If X, then Y”) and tries to conclude something based on the consequent—i.e., on the Y term. So the first mistake the stimulus makes is to argue along the lines “All intelligent people are nearsighted; I am nearsighted, therefore I must be intelligent.” But the stimulus doesn’t stop there: it intensifies both terms, arguing that since I am very nearsighted, I must be very intelligent (a genius, in fact). There’s no grounds for connecting degree of nearsightedness to degree of intelligence, so that’s a second flaw. (D) shows the same pattern. Based on the statement “All tall people are happy” or “All X are Y,” (D) infers not simply that “Since John is happy, he must be tall” (or “Y, therefore X”) but goes the extra mile and concludes “Since John is extremely happy, he must be extremely tall.”
(A) takes the evidence, “All intelligent people are nearsighted” (All X are Y), and goes on to infer something from the negation of the consequent or the Y term: “I have perfect vision” (i.e. “I am NOT nearsighted” or NOT-Y), therefore I must be stupid” (i.e. “I am NOT intelligent” or NOT-X). Thus, although (A) does include the same intensification we find in the stimulus, the structure of the argument is different.
(B) follows the stimulus in reasoning “All X are Y; Y, therefore X” but misses the second flaw, that of intensifying the terms.
(C) is a mess; there’s nothing connecting the idea of the number of legs an animal has to its size, nothing relating pigs to spiders, and, in fact, nothing remotely similar to the stimulus.
(E) simply runs “All X are Y (All geniuses are very nearsighted); X (I am a genius), therefore Y (I must be very nearsighted). That’s valid and not parallel.
Answer: D
Hope it helps
samarpan.g28
Joined: 08 Dec 2023
Last visit: 18 Feb 2026
Posts: 310
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Human Resources
GPA: 8.88
WE:Engineering (Technology)
Posts: 310
Nahid078
The modifier 'extremely' in option D aligns with 'very' in the argument. Option B is related too, but it lacks the modifier so I chose (D).
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.
_________________
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.
_________________
Moderators:
Announcements
Tuck at Dartmouth
AI at Dartmouth Tuck: How the School Is Preparing Leaders for the Age of Artificial Intelligence
Inside the courses, research, and hands-on learning defining wise, decisive leadership in an AI-driven world.
Read More
Inside the courses, research, and hands-on learning defining wise, decisive leadership in an AI-driven world.
Read More
Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos
Success stories and strategies from high-scoring candidates.