There is little plausibility to the claim

Question

There is little plausibility to the claim that it is absurd to criticize anyone for being critical. Obviously, people must assess one another and not all assessments will be positive. However, there is wisdom behind the injunction against being judgmental. To be judgmental is not merely to assess someone negatively, but to do so prior to a serious effort at understanding. Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion drawn in the argument?

(A) To be judgmental is to assess someone negatively prior to making a serious effort at understanding. 
(B) It is absurd to criticize anyone for being critical. 
(C) There is some plausibility to the claim that it is absurd to criticize anyone for being critical. 
(D) Not all assessments people make of one another will be positive. 
(E) There is wisdom behind the injunction against being judgmental

goforgmat · Answer

I don't think its a Gmat like question.

Option E is just a direct statement from the passage!
Whats the source?

himanshuv · Answer

Not sure if this is a gmat type question, but here is my take :

The question asks, which one of the following most accurately expresses the  main conclusion .
Basically, what is the key takeaway from the paragraph above

The message that the author is trying to convey here is that there is wisdom behind the injuction against being judgemental

For the other options :
(A) To be judgmental is to assess someone negatively prior to making a serious effort at understanding. 
This is something that the author mentions, but it isn't his main point. He uses this to support the main conclusion
(B) It is absurd to criticize anyone for being critical. 
The author does not state this, but in fact somewhat opposes it
(C) There is some plausibility to the claim that it is absurd to criticize anyone for being critical. 
Could be true, but is not the main conclusion
(D) Not all assessments people make of one another will be positive. 
Again true, but isn't the main conclusion

umg · Answer

The question asks us to identify the conclusion. Best way to do so is - Why Test.

There is little plausibility to the claim that it is absurd to criticize anyone for being critical.  WHY? - No Answer.

Obviously, people must assess one another and not all assessments will be positive  WHY? - No Answer.

However, there is wisdom behind the injunction against being judgmental  WHY? - Because -  To be judgmental is not merely to assess someone negatively, but to do so prior to a serious effort at understanding.

There we have it. The lines colored Green are Premises and the one in Blue is the conclusion. Answer - E

nightblade354 · Answer

Good LSAT question that focuses on parts of the question (similar to bold face)!

bestfaculty03 · Answer

A wonderful question to test one's reading and reasoning skills!

In the first sentence, the author rejects the idea that it is absurd to criticize anyone for being critical (it is alright to criticize anyone for being critical).
The author then goes on saying, after all people must assess one another and all assessments may not be positive (goes well with the author’s assertion that it is alright to criticize anyone for being critical). 
Finally, the author puts forward his idea that one should not be judgmental because being judgmental is not only assessing someone negatively but also doing so before an effort to understand something.
 In short , the author says that it is alright to criticize anyone for being critical, but one should not be judgmental.

Let's look at the options, and try to eliminate the incorrect options:

(A) To be judgmental is to assess someone negatively prior to making a serious effort at understanding.   This is a premise that supports the author's opinion that one should not be judgmental.  
 (B) It is absurd to criticize anyone for being critical.    This goes against what author has said in the argument. 
 (C) There is some plausibility to the claim that it is absurd to criticize anyone for being critical.   The author says that there is little plausibility to the claim that it is absurd to criticize anyone for being critical, meaning that the claim is not valid, and it is alright to criticize anyone for being critical. However, the option says that there is some plausibility to the claim, meaning that the claim is valid to an extent. Thus, this option states opposite to what the author has stated in the argument. 
 (D) Not all assessments people make of one another will be positive.    This is a piece of information that goes well with the overall argument; it is not a conclusion stated by the author.  
 (E) There is wisdom behind the injunction against being judgmental   This is exactly what the author says in the argument.

Hence, the main conclusion of the argument is that there is wisdom behind the injunction against being judgmental. Hence, option (e).

gullyboy09 · Answer

Hi  MartyMurray , can you please help me with this question. I got why E is correct! But here I can see one more conclusion, - "There is little plausibility to the claim that it is absurd to criticise anyone for being critical." Although this was not a part of any option, so E was easy to pick. My query is what if this option was also present, then which one would be main conclusion?

guddo · Answer

There is little plausibility to the claim that it is absurd to criticize anyone for being critical. Obviously, people must assess one another and not all assessments will be positive. However, there is wisdom behind the injunction against being judgmental. To be judgmental is not merely to assess someone negatively, but to do so prior to a serious effort at understanding.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion drawn in the argument?

Argument summary:

The author rejects the idea that criticizing criticism is absurd. Then the author explains why the warning against being judgmental still makes sense: being judgmental means judging negatively  without first trying seriously to understand .

(A) To be judgmental is to assess someone negatively prior to making a serious effort at understanding.

This is a definition used to support the argument’s point. It explains why the injunction has wisdom behind it, but it is not the main conclusion.

(B) It is absurd to criticize anyone for being critical.

This is the view the author rejects in the first sentence.

(C) There is some plausibility to the claim that it is absurd to criticize anyone for being critical.

This is the opposite of the first sentence. The author says there is little plausibility to that claim.

(D) Not all assessments people make of one another will be positive.

This is a supporting premise. It explains why criticism itself is sometimes unavoidable.

(E) There is wisdom behind the injunction against being judgmental

This is the main conclusion. The rest of the argument explains why this is true, mainly by distinguishing ordinary criticism from being  judgmental .

Answer: (E)

MartyMurray · Answer

Interesting question.

If "There is little plausibility to the claim that it is absurd to criticise anyone for being critical," the first statement of the passage, were one of the answer choices, I think choice (E) would still be the correct answer.

The reason why is that, even though the first statement is in a way supported by the second sentence, we can tell that both of those sentences are used to provide context for the conclusion that follows, which is " there is wisdom behind the injunction against being judgmental," which is stated by  choice (E).

It's a bit of a tough call, but choice (E) appears to state the final conclusion that the author lands on.

That said, if the sentence you mentioned were an answer choice, the fairness of the question would be debatable because the conclusion stated by choice (E) is only slightly and subtly more "main" than the one stated by the first sentence of the passage.

There is little plausibility to the claim

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

There is little plausibility to the claim

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