by: SUZYC
13 mins
by: Bunuel
19 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
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
75%
(hard)
Question Stats:
53% (02:02) correct
47%
(02:15)
wrong
based on 612
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
In a theocracy, politicians not only have to understand the laws of the land, but also the edicts of the god(s) or religion that their society follows. This type of understanding is difficult because it combines secular knowledge with the requisite of a more abstract and spiritual knowledge. Many people cannot adequately fulfill this dual requirement, which is why there are fewer total politicians in all the theocratic governments throughout the world than in all the democratic governments.
For the argument to be logically correct, it must make which of the following assumptions?
(A) There are not more democratic nations than theocratic nations in the world.
(B) Theocratic politicians need to assess the spirituality of their polity when making decisions.
(C) Theocratic nations satisfy the needs of their people better by using fewer politicians.
(D) Democratic nations require a larger number of politicians on average due to the numerous factions that their politicians represent.
(E) The edicts of any sort of god are not knowable or understandable as they apply to politics.
For the argument to be logically correct, it must make which of the following assumptions?
(A) There are not more democratic nations than theocratic nations in the world.
(B) Theocratic politicians need to assess the spirituality of their polity when making decisions.
(C) Theocratic nations satisfy the needs of their people better by using fewer politicians.
(D) Democratic nations require a larger number of politicians on average due to the numerous factions that their politicians represent.
(E) The edicts of any sort of god are not knowable or understandable as they apply to politics.
Conclusion: "Many people cannot adequately fulfill this dual requirement, which is why there are fewer total politicians in all the theocratic governments throughout the world than in all the democratic governments."
To make this conclusion logical, we need to know whether fewer politicians are because of complexity of Theocracy or of some other reasons.
Only A.claryfy this logic.
A is the answer
Posted from my mobile device
To make this conclusion logical, we need to know whether fewer politicians are because of complexity of Theocracy or of some other reasons.
Only A.claryfy this logic.
A is the answer
Posted from my mobile device
anuj04
How does it matter how many democratic nations exists ?? Are we assuming that a person belonging to Country X can serve as a Politician (or elected representative) of Country Y ??
AdityaHongunti
Joined: 20 Sep 2016
Last visit: 31 Mar 2021
Posts: 527
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
GPA: 3.6
WE:Operations (Consumer Packaged Goods)
Posts: 527
In a theocracy, politicians not only have to understand the laws of the land, but also the edicts of the god(s) or religion that their society follows. This type of understanding is difficult because it combines secular knowledge with the requisite of a more abstract and spiritual knowledge. Many people cannot adequately fulfill this dual requirement, which is why there are fewer total politicians in all the theocratic governments throughout the world than in all the democratic governments.
- theo: politicians have to understand 1)laws 2)edicts of God
- this together understanding is difficult because it consists varied ethics: secular(not specifically religious) AND spiritual(pertaining to religion or beliefs)
-many people cannot adequately fulfill this requirement
-that is why there are more politicians of democratic govt. Than there are politicians in Theo govt.
Conclusion:many people cannot fulfill this requirement
Think: politicians in Theo need somewhat weird understanding which involves two opposite facets 1) related to secularism 2) more religious and with beliefs
Now the author tells us that the understanding is difficult , also he tells us that the politicians not only have to consider X but also Y...but are the edicts a necessary element to run the govt?? I mean if the politicians do not take the abstract element into account ,will the governance end??? Or will the decisions be stopped??
(A) There are not more democratic nations than theocratic nations in the world.
- though this is OA, I'm reserved about this for following reasons
: 1)Nation= public point of view
2) a democratic nation does not have decisions to be made which involve abstract elements to be considered
eg: India is the largest democracy but the govt(politicians) HAVE TO(NEED TO) consider the religious (abstract) aspects before making any decisions...trust me this is true... So basically this is more like Theo politicians in demo govt.
(B) Theocratic politicians need to assess the spirituality of their polity when making decisions.
- I go for this .. if politicians do not NEED to assess the abstract then the reason(that is the conclusion) the fact( more Theo politicians than demo ) is based on some other reason and not the conclusion (unfulfillment of requirement)
This actually goes beyond general knowledge...do we know a democratic nation does not take into account the abstract facet and a democratic nation is actually what the public demands.. the greatest example I present against this question is INDIA (largest democratic country in the world) ,where decisions if at all go against even one religion , just watch the news the next day then
Posted from my mobile device
- theo: politicians have to understand 1)laws 2)edicts of God
- this together understanding is difficult because it consists varied ethics: secular(not specifically religious) AND spiritual(pertaining to religion or beliefs)
-many people cannot adequately fulfill this requirement
-that is why there are more politicians of democratic govt. Than there are politicians in Theo govt.
Conclusion:many people cannot fulfill this requirement
Think: politicians in Theo need somewhat weird understanding which involves two opposite facets 1) related to secularism 2) more religious and with beliefs
Now the author tells us that the understanding is difficult , also he tells us that the politicians not only have to consider X but also Y...but are the edicts a necessary element to run the govt?? I mean if the politicians do not take the abstract element into account ,will the governance end??? Or will the decisions be stopped??
(A) There are not more democratic nations than theocratic nations in the world.
- though this is OA, I'm reserved about this for following reasons
: 1)Nation= public point of view
2) a democratic nation does not have decisions to be made which involve abstract elements to be considered
eg: India is the largest democracy but the govt(politicians) HAVE TO(NEED TO) consider the religious (abstract) aspects before making any decisions...trust me this is true... So basically this is more like Theo politicians in demo govt.
(B) Theocratic politicians need to assess the spirituality of their polity when making decisions.
- I go for this .. if politicians do not NEED to assess the abstract then the reason(that is the conclusion) the fact( more Theo politicians than demo ) is based on some other reason and not the conclusion (unfulfillment of requirement)
This actually goes beyond general knowledge...do we know a democratic nation does not take into account the abstract facet and a democratic nation is actually what the public demands.. the greatest example I present against this question is INDIA (largest democratic country in the world) ,where decisions if at all go against even one religion , just watch the news the next day then
Posted from my mobile device
Posts: 49
AdityaHongunti
Can you please explain the last line of the argument?
From what i understand is that the number of total (theocratic) politicians is lesser than the number of democratic politicians in the world.
I agree with (B) as well. The argument says that due to the dual responsibility, not many people can take up such a role. (B) tells us why- they have to consider the religious aspect as well
AdityaHongunti
Joined: 20 Sep 2016
Last visit: 31 Mar 2021
Posts: 527
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
GPA: 3.6
WE:Operations (Consumer Packaged Goods)
Posts: 527
ParthSanghavi
You are right in your analysis. Additionally, this question hinges on very philosophical/constitutional knowledge ,which is beyond a certain level of understanding the GMAT expects from us
According to me
Posted from my mobile device
You are right in your analysis. Additionally, this question hinges on very philosophical/constitutional knowledge ,which is beyond a certain level of understanding the GMAT expects from us
According to me
Posted from my mobile device
Posts: 30
Author is saying that because of the complex nature of theocracy, there are fewer politicians that are qualified that can fit into this role.
Author therefore says that there are FEWER TOTAL THEOCRATIC POLITICIANS than TOTAL DEMOCRATIC POLITICIANS in the WHOLE WORLD simply because a theocracy is more complex than a democracy. Fair enough. What important detail does the author omit?
Maybe the reason why there are FEWER TOTAL THEOCRATIC POLITICIANS than TOTAL DEMOCRATIC POLITICIANS is because there are FEWER THEOCRATIC GOVERNMENTS IN THE WORLD. Sure, the complex nature of a theocracy might mean that it is harder to find reasonable candidates. But this conclusion can only be sustained if we knew the EXACT number of total democracies and theocracies in the world. Imagine 2 known theocracies in the world with 5 politicians versus 100 known democracies with only 2 politicians each (10 total people versus 200 total people) --> big difference. Therefore, the assumption is that the total number of governments or institutions is the same (specifically that the number of theocracies = number of democracies).
A) correctly identifies this assumption. I.e, if there were an equal amount of democracies and theocracies, then yes, we might see fewer total theocratic politicians than total democratic politicians.
Author therefore says that there are FEWER TOTAL THEOCRATIC POLITICIANS than TOTAL DEMOCRATIC POLITICIANS in the WHOLE WORLD simply because a theocracy is more complex than a democracy. Fair enough. What important detail does the author omit?
Maybe the reason why there are FEWER TOTAL THEOCRATIC POLITICIANS than TOTAL DEMOCRATIC POLITICIANS is because there are FEWER THEOCRATIC GOVERNMENTS IN THE WORLD. Sure, the complex nature of a theocracy might mean that it is harder to find reasonable candidates. But this conclusion can only be sustained if we knew the EXACT number of total democracies and theocracies in the world. Imagine 2 known theocracies in the world with 5 politicians versus 100 known democracies with only 2 politicians each (10 total people versus 200 total people) --> big difference. Therefore, the assumption is that the total number of governments or institutions is the same (specifically that the number of theocracies = number of democracies).
A) correctly identifies this assumption. I.e, if there were an equal amount of democracies and theocracies, then yes, we might see fewer total theocratic politicians than total democratic politicians.
Posts: 21
chetan2u : sir, i could not chose between D and A - can you pls help in getting the hang of the question...
@karishmaB kindly explain why A is correct not B??
Can anyone solve this by negation? I don't think option A will have any effect of negation. If more Demo > Theo - More politicians there, if Theo > Demo still more politicians in Demo as per passage.
At the same time, the total no. of politicians (even if lesser) in one large Theo country can be greater than 10 small democratic countries.
At the same time, the total no. of politicians (even if lesser) in one large Theo country can be greater than 10 small democratic countries.
ClaireCHEN
Joined: 09 Jul 2024
Last visit: 15 Jan 2025
Posts: 23
Location: China
Schools: Anderson '27 Marshall '27
GMAT Focus 1: 635 Q90 V77 DI77 
GPA: 3.2
Premise: Theocracy has higher requirement in understanding both secular land law knowledge and abstract spiritual knowledge, few people can fulfill this requirement
Conclusion: ttl n of theocratic politicians is less than the ttl n of democratic politicians
For the argument to be logically correct, it must make which of the following assumptions?
(A) There are not more democratic nations than theocratic nations in the world. -- YES. If there are more democratic nations than theocratic nations, then the ttl n of democratics is more than the ttl n of theocratics would be caused by the diiferent denominators but not the requirements of theocratics itself.
(B) Theocratic politicians need to assess the spirituality of their polity when making decisions. -- NO. Irrelevant to reasoning above between the knowledge capturing level and ttl n
(C) Theocratic nations satisfy the needs of their people better by using fewer politicians. -- NO. Irrelevant to the conclusion.
(D) Democratic nations require a larger number of politicians on average due to the numerous factions that their politicians represent. --NO. Doesn't necessarily mean the theocratic politicians number cannot exceed.
(E) The edicts of any sort of god are not knowable or understandable as they apply to politics. --NO. It's against the statement of these knowledge is just hard to know or understand, but not "not knowable or understandable"
Conclusion: ttl n of theocratic politicians is less than the ttl n of democratic politicians
For the argument to be logically correct, it must make which of the following assumptions?
(A) There are not more democratic nations than theocratic nations in the world. -- YES. If there are more democratic nations than theocratic nations, then the ttl n of democratics is more than the ttl n of theocratics would be caused by the diiferent denominators but not the requirements of theocratics itself.
(B) Theocratic politicians need to assess the spirituality of their polity when making decisions. -- NO. Irrelevant to reasoning above between the knowledge capturing level and ttl n
(C) Theocratic nations satisfy the needs of their people better by using fewer politicians. -- NO. Irrelevant to the conclusion.
(D) Democratic nations require a larger number of politicians on average due to the numerous factions that their politicians represent. --NO. Doesn't necessarily mean the theocratic politicians number cannot exceed.
(E) The edicts of any sort of god are not knowable or understandable as they apply to politics. --NO. It's against the statement of these knowledge is just hard to know or understand, but not "not knowable or understandable"
Moderators:
Announcements
How to Tell If Your GMAT Prep Resources Are Actually Helping You
Subscribe to GMAT Club for New Podcast Episodes, Debriefs, & Insightful Sessions on GMAT Preparation
Subscribe to GMAT Club for New Podcast Episodes, Debriefs, & Insightful Sessions on GMAT Preparation
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.