Last visit was: 27 Apr 2026, 23:04 It is currently 27 Apr 2026, 23:04
Home
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Close
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
Your Progress

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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
User avatar
AshutoshB
User avatar
Joined: 07 Dec 2017
Last visit: 16 Jan 2022
Posts: 322
Own Kudos:
2,320
 [9]
Given Kudos: 348
GMAT 1: 650 Q50 V28
GMAT 2: 720 Q49 V40
Products:
My Reviews
GMAT 2: 720 Q49 V40
Posts: 322
Kudos: 2,320
 [9]
Armstrong: For the treatment of a particular disease, Dr. Sullivan arg 14 Aug 2018, 05:31
6
Kudos
Add Kudos
3
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
00:00
Start Timer
Pause Timer
Resume Timer
Show Answer
Hide
Show
History
D
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!

Difficulty:

45% (medium)

Question Stats:

63% (01:32) correct 37% (01:49) wrong based on 669 sessions

History

Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Armstrong: For the treatment of a particular disease, Dr. Sullivan argues for using nutritional supplements rather than the pharrnaceuticals
that most doctors prescribe. But this is in his self-interest since he is paid to endorse a line of nutritional supplements. Thus, we should not use nutritional supplements in treating the disease.

Armstrong's argument is flawed in that it


A. relies on two different meanings of the term "supplement" to draw a conclusion

B. relies solely on an appeal to an authority whose trustworthiness should not necessarily be taken for granted

C. appeals to people's emotions regarding the treatment of disease rather than to the efficacy of the two approaches to treatment

D. criticizes Dr. Sullivan's motives for holding a position rather than addressing the position itself

E.. fails to justify its presumption that nutritional supplements cannot be used in conjunction with other treatments



LSAT
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
D
User avatar
chetan2u
User avatar
GMAT Expert
Joined: 02 Aug 2009
Last visit: 27 Apr 2026
Posts: 11,231
Own Kudos:
45,032
 [2]
Given Kudos: 335
Status:Math and DI Expert
Location: India
Concentration: Human Resources, General Management
GMAT Focus 1: 735 Q90 V89 DI81
Products:
My Reviews
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 735 Q90 V89 DI81
Posts: 11,231
Kudos: 45,032
 [2]
Armstrong: For the treatment of a particular disease, Dr. Sullivan arg 14 Aug 2018, 08:59
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AshutoshB
Armstrong: For the treatment of a particular disease, Dr. Sullivan argues for using nutritional supplements rather than the pharrnaceuticals
that most doctors prescribe. But this is in his self-interest since he is paid to endorse a line of nutritional supplements. Thus, we should not use nutritional supplements in treating the disease.

Armstrong's argument is flawed in that it

A. relies on two different meanings of the term "supplement" to draw a conclusion

B. relies solely on an appeal to an authority whose trustworthiness should not necessarily be taken for granted

C. appeals to people's emotions regarding the treatment of disease rather than to the efficacy of the two approaches to treatment

D. criticizes Dr. Sullivan's motives for holding a position rather than addressing the position itself

E.. fails to justify its presumption that nutritional supplements cannot be used in conjunction with other treatments

LSAT

KUDOS will be Appreciated
Show more

Armstrong initially attacks Dr S method and there after attaches his personal motive to that method.
So he does not attack the shortcomings of the method but involves personal motive to the method.

D gives the exact reasoning
User avatar
Armstrong: For the treatment of a particular disease, Dr. Sullivan arg 18 Aug 2018, 12:49
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
chetan2u
AshutoshB
Armstrong: For the treatment of a particular disease, Dr. Sullivan argues for using nutritional supplements rather than the pharrnaceuticals
that most doctors prescribe. But this is in his self-interest since he is paid to endorse a line of nutritional supplements. Thus, we should not use nutritional supplements in treating the disease.

Armstrong's argument is flawed in that it

A. relies on two different meanings of the term "supplement" to draw a conclusion

B. relies solely on an appeal to an authority whose trustworthiness should not necessarily be taken for granted

C. appeals to people's emotions regarding the treatment of disease rather than to the efficacy of the two approaches to treatment

D. criticizes Dr. Sullivan's motives for holding a position rather than addressing the position itself

E.. fails to justify its presumption that nutritional supplements cannot be used in conjunction with other treatments

LSAT

KUDOS will be Appreciated

Armstrong initially attacks Dr S method and there after attaches his personal motive to that method.
So he does not attack the shortcomings of the method but involves personal motive to the method.

D gives the exact reasoning
Show more

Hi Chetan2u,
Can you please explain option D again. Armstrong did not initially attack Dr. Sullivan's method. He found a reason that since personal motives are involved, w cant trust Dr. Sulivan.
Option D states that- D. criticizes Dr. Sullivan's motives for holding a position rather than addressing the position itself
I think the flaw is Armstrong's method of reasoning to dismiss Sulivan's claim. Armstrong does not need to address the position whether nutritional supplements are better than the pharrnaceutical supplements. His logic of reasoning to dismiss Sulivan's claim is wrong.
Please help me on this.
User avatar
GMAT215
User avatar
Joined: 01 Feb 2018
Last visit: 20 Jul 2022
Posts: 53
Own Kudos:
21
Given Kudos: 157
Location: India
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Marketing
GPA: 4
WE:Consulting (Consulting)
Posts: 53
Kudos: 21
Armstrong: For the treatment of a particular disease, Dr. Sullivan arg 09 Nov 2018, 04:15
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
pls help me to how OA is correct.. cant really link OA with question stem :(
User avatar
VeritasPrepBrian
User avatar
Veritas Prep Representative
Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Last visit: 02 Mar 2022
Posts: 416
Own Kudos:
3,270
 [3]
Given Kudos: 63
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 416
Kudos: 3,270
 [3]
Armstrong: For the treatment of a particular disease, Dr. Sullivan arg 11 Nov 2018, 14:04
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
If you break down this argument:

Sentence 1 is background information telling us that this doctor recommends supplements.

Sentence 2 is the evidence for the conclusion: the doctor is acting in self interest! Notice, too, that the supplements aren't mentioned here...just the doctor.

Sentence 3 is the conclusion: therefore, we shouldn't use these supplements.

So if we're looking for a flaw in reasoning, it has to do with Sentence 2, or how 2 interacts with 3.

Look at what's missing between 2 and 3 - the only piece of evidence for "don't use the supplements" is "the doctor acts in self-interest." The major premise never mentions the supplements! All it does is mention how the doctor is motivated. And that's the flaw: the conclusion says that you shouldn't use supplements, but its only evidence is about the motives of one person who recommends the supplements - we don't have any evidence that the supplements are ineffective (or bad for any other reason). And that's what D tells us.
User avatar
RohitSaluja
User avatar
Joined: 02 Aug 2020
Last visit: 21 Sep 2024
Posts: 198
Own Kudos:
94
 [1]
Given Kudos: 254
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Healthcare
Schools: HEC'22 (J)
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V40
GPA: 3.8
WE:Consulting (Healthcare/Pharmaceuticals)
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: HEC'22 (J)
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V40
Posts: 198
Kudos: 94
 [1]
Armstrong: For the treatment of a particular disease, Dr. Sullivan arg 09 Mar 2021, 03:43
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
AshutoshB
Armstrong: For the treatment of a particular disease, Dr. Sullivan argues for using nutritional supplements rather than the pharrnaceuticals
that most doctors prescribe. But this is in his self-interest since he is paid to endorse a line of nutritional supplements. Thus, we should not use nutritional supplements in treating the disease.

Armstrong's argument is flawed in that it


A. relies on two different meanings of the term "supplement" to draw a conclusion

B. relies solely on an appeal to an authority whose trustworthiness should not necessarily be taken for granted

C. appeals to people's emotions regarding the treatment of disease rather than to the efficacy of the two approaches to treatment

D. criticizes Dr. Sullivan's motives for holding a position rather than addressing the position itself

E.. fails to justify its presumption that nutritional supplements cannot be used in conjunction with other treatments



LSAT
Show more


Analysis of the argument

Dr. Sullivan argues for using nutritional supplements rather than the pharmaceuticals supplement. Armstrong senses something fishy is going on as he knows Dr. Sullivan also get commision on promoting nutritional supplements and concludes that nutritional supplements should not be used. Let'us look at the options now

A. relies on two different meanings of the term "supplement" to draw a conclusion Nowhere in the argument the term supplement has been used in different contexts, hence this is out

B. relies solely on an appeal to an authority whose trustworthiness should not necessarily be taken for granted Nowhere in the argument any appeal to authority was made

C. appeals to people's emotions regarding the treatment of disease rather than to the efficacy of the two approaches to treatment Nowhere in the argument any heed was paid to any emotions

D. criticizes Dr. Sullivan's motives for holding a position rather than addressing the position itself He attacks at the Sullivan's position rather than stating anything about position itself, one e.g. could be Rohit is asking us to join anti-smoking campaign organized by him, but Rohit smokes himself, so we should not listen to him, in this argument, the author is not addressin the position in question but is attacking Rohit

E. fails to justify its presumption that nutritional supplements cannot be used in conjunction with other treatments Armstrong never criticized the use of nutritional supplements rather he criticized that Dr. Sullivan has motives to promote them, so if Sullivan is promoting those supplements, he is only doing out of devious intentions.
User avatar
vishujn2
User avatar
Joined: 11 May 2021
Last visit: 22 Feb 2025
Posts: 17
Own Kudos:
21
Given Kudos: 159
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Finance
Schools: IIM (WL) IIM (WL) ISB '27 (S) IIM (A)
GMAT Focus 1: 655 Q90 V80 DI78
Schools: IIM (WL) IIM (WL) ISB '27 (S) IIM (A)
GMAT Focus 1: 655 Q90 V80 DI78
Posts: 17
Kudos: 21
Armstrong: For the treatment of a particular disease, Dr. Sullivan arg 24 Sep 2022, 05:18
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
RohitSaluja
AshutoshB
Armstrong: For the treatment of a particular disease, Dr. Sullivan argues for using nutritional supplements rather than the pharrnaceuticals
that most doctors prescribe. But this is in his self-interest since he is paid to endorse a line of nutritional supplements. Thus, we should not use nutritional supplements in treating the disease.

Armstrong's argument is flawed in that it


A. relies on two different meanings of the term "supplement" to draw a conclusion

B. relies solely on an appeal to an authority whose trustworthiness should not necessarily be taken for granted

C. appeals to people's emotions regarding the treatment of disease rather than to the efficacy of the two approaches to treatment

D. criticizes Dr. Sullivan's motives for holding a position rather than addressing the position itself



f in option E -fails to justify its presumption that nutritional supplements can be used in conjunction with other treatment .
can be a weaker or not

E.. fails to justify its presumption that nutritional supplements cannot be used in conjunction with other treatments



LSAT


Analysis of the argument

Dr. Sullivan argues for using nutritional supplements rather than the pharmaceuticals supplement. Armstrong senses something fishy is going on as he knows Dr. Sullivan also get commision on promoting nutritional supplements and concludes that nutritional supplements should not be used. Let'us look at the options now

A. relies on two different meanings of the term "supplement" to draw a conclusion Nowhere in the argument the term supplement has been used in different contexts, hence this is out

B. relies solely on an appeal to an authority whose trustworthiness should not necessarily be taken for granted Nowhere in the argument any appeal to authority was made

C. appeals to people's emotions regarding the treatment of disease rather than to the efficacy of the two approaches to treatment Nowhere in the argument any heed was paid to any emotions

D. criticizes Dr. Sullivan's motives for holding a position rather than addressing the position itself He attacks at the Sullivan's position rather than stating anything about position itself, one e.g. could be Rohit is asking us to join anti-smoking campaign organized by him, but Rohit smokes himself, so we should not listen to him, in this argument, the author is not addressin the position in question but is attacking Rohit

E. fails to justify its presumption that nutritional supplements cannot be used in conjunction with other treatments Armstrong never criticized the use of nutritional supplements rather he criticized that Dr. Sullivan has motives to promote them, so if Sullivan is promoting those supplements, he is only doing out of devious intentions.
Show more


f in option E -fails to justify its presumption that nutritional supplements can be used in conjunction with other treatment .
can be a weaker or not
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 19,418
Own Kudos:
1,010
Posts: 19,418
Kudos: 1,010
Armstrong: For the treatment of a particular disease, Dr. Sullivan arg 29 Apr 2025, 02:30
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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.
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7391 posts
AbhishekP220108
507 posts
bhanu29
363 posts