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.
Apr 2301:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Struggling with GMAT Verbal as a non-native speaker? Harsh improved his score from 595 to 695 in just 45 days—and scored a 99 %ile in Verbal (V88)! Learn how smart strategy, clarity, and guided prep helped him gain 100 points.
Apr 2308:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Video explanations + diagnosis of 10 weakest areas + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Apr 2512:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
31 Jul 2019, 18:07
Kudos
Bookmarks
A
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:
66% (01:45) correct
34%
(01:44)
wrong
based on 584
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
If Max were guilty, he would not ask the police to investigate. Therefore, his asking the police to investigate shows that he is not guilty.
The logical structure of the argument above is most similar to which one of the following?
(A) If Lucille were in the next room, I would not be able to see her. Therefore, the fact that I can see her shows that she is not in the next room.
(B) If Sam were rich, he would not spend his vacation in Alaska. Therefore, his spending his vacation in the Bahamas shows that he is rich.
(C) If Joe were over 40 he would not want to learn to ski. Therefore, the fact that he does not want to learn to ski shows that he is over 40.
(D) If Mark were a good cook, he would not put cinnamon in the chili. Therefore, the fact that he is not a good cook shows that he put cinnamon in the chili.
(E) If Sally were sociable, she would not avoid her friends. Therefore, the fact that she is sociable shows that she does not avoid her friends.
The logical structure of the argument above is most similar to which one of the following?
(A) If Lucille were in the next room, I would not be able to see her. Therefore, the fact that I can see her shows that she is not in the next room.
(B) If Sam were rich, he would not spend his vacation in Alaska. Therefore, his spending his vacation in the Bahamas shows that he is rich.
(C) If Joe were over 40 he would not want to learn to ski. Therefore, the fact that he does not want to learn to ski shows that he is over 40.
(D) If Mark were a good cook, he would not put cinnamon in the chili. Therefore, the fact that he is not a good cook shows that he put cinnamon in the chili.
(E) If Sally were sociable, she would not avoid her friends. Therefore, the fact that she is sociable shows that she does not avoid her friends.
31 Jul 2019, 18:52
Kudos
Bookmarks
Consider:
X: Max guilty.
Y: Asking police to investigate.
The original structure is in form:
If Max were guilty (If X), then he would not ask the police to investigate (Not Y).
He is asking the police to investigate (Y) shows that he is not guilty (so No X).
If X then No Y. Y so No X.
We need to find an argument with above pattern.
(A) If Lucille were in the next room (if X), I would not be able to see her (then No Y). Therefore, the fact that I can see her (Y) shows that she is not in the next room (so No X).
It's in pattern: If X then No Y. Y so No X. Correct.
(B) If Sam were rich (if X), he would not spend his vacation in Alaska (so No Y). Therefore, his spending his vacation in the Bahamas (Y) shows that he is rich (so X).
It's in pattern: If X then No Y. Y so X. Wrong.
(C) If Joe were over 40 (if X) he would not want to learn to ski (then No Y). Therefore, the fact that he does not want to learn to ski (not Y) shows that he is over 40 (so X).
It's in pattern: If X then No Y. Not Y so X. Wrong.
(D) If Mark were a good cook (If X), he would not put cinnamon in the chili (then No Y). Therefore, the fact that he is not a good cook (Not X) shows that he put cinnamon in the chili (So Y).
It's in pattern: If X then No Y. Not X so Y. Wrong.
(E) If Sally were sociable (If X), she would not avoid her friends (then No Y). Therefore, the fact that she is sociable (X) shows that she does not avoid her friends (so not Y).
It's in pattern: If X then No Y. X so not Y. Wrong.
The pattern of A matches best with original.
Answer A.
Posted from my mobile device
X: Max guilty.
Y: Asking police to investigate.
The original structure is in form:
If Max were guilty (If X), then he would not ask the police to investigate (Not Y).
He is asking the police to investigate (Y) shows that he is not guilty (so No X).
If X then No Y. Y so No X.
We need to find an argument with above pattern.
(A) If Lucille were in the next room (if X), I would not be able to see her (then No Y). Therefore, the fact that I can see her (Y) shows that she is not in the next room (so No X).
It's in pattern: If X then No Y. Y so No X. Correct.
(B) If Sam were rich (if X), he would not spend his vacation in Alaska (so No Y). Therefore, his spending his vacation in the Bahamas (Y) shows that he is rich (so X).
It's in pattern: If X then No Y. Y so X. Wrong.
(C) If Joe were over 40 (if X) he would not want to learn to ski (then No Y). Therefore, the fact that he does not want to learn to ski (not Y) shows that he is over 40 (so X).
It's in pattern: If X then No Y. Not Y so X. Wrong.
(D) If Mark were a good cook (If X), he would not put cinnamon in the chili (then No Y). Therefore, the fact that he is not a good cook (Not X) shows that he put cinnamon in the chili (So Y).
It's in pattern: If X then No Y. Not X so Y. Wrong.
(E) If Sally were sociable (If X), she would not avoid her friends (then No Y). Therefore, the fact that she is sociable (X) shows that she does not avoid her friends (so not Y).
It's in pattern: If X then No Y. X so not Y. Wrong.
The pattern of A matches best with original.
Answer A.
Posted from my mobile device
General Discussion
Cav
Joined: 18 Jul 2022
Last visit: 22 Aug 2025
Posts: 23
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 96
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, Operations
Schools: Judge '26 (A$$)
GMAT 1: 640 Q45 V32
GMAT 2: 710 Q47 V40
15 Mar 2023, 06:05
Kudos
Bookmarks
It's a simple logical structure in the form If X, then not Y; since, Y, so not X, where X: Max is guilty, and Y: asking the police to investigate.
Keeping this structure in mind, we can easily eliminate wrong options:
(A) If Lucille were in the next room (if X), I would not be able to see her (not Y). Therefore, the fact that I can see her (since Y) shows that she is not in the next room (so not X). Correct
(B) If Sam were rich (if X), he would not spend his vacation in Alaska (not Y). Therefore, his spending his vacation in the Bahamas (since Y) shows that he is rich (so X). Incorrect.
Notice also that option (B) says he would not spend his vacation in Alaska but then mentions Bahamas instead of Alaska in the next part of the argument. So, clearly wrong.
(C) If Joe were over 40 (if X) he would not want to learn to ski (not Y). Therefore, the fact that he does not want to learn to ski (since not Y) shows that he is over 40 (so X). Incorrect
(D) If Mark were a good cook (if X), he would not put cinnamon in the chili (not Y). Therefore, the fact that he is not a good cook (since not X) shows that he put cinnamon in the chili (so Y). Incorrect
(E) If Sally were sociable (if X), she would not avoid her friends (not Y). Therefore, the fact that she is sociable (since X) shows that she does not avoid her friends (so not Y). Incorrect
Keeping this structure in mind, we can easily eliminate wrong options:
(A) If Lucille were in the next room (if X), I would not be able to see her (not Y). Therefore, the fact that I can see her (since Y) shows that she is not in the next room (so not X). Correct
(B) If Sam were rich (if X), he would not spend his vacation in Alaska (not Y). Therefore, his spending his vacation in the Bahamas (since Y) shows that he is rich (so X). Incorrect.
Notice also that option (B) says he would not spend his vacation in Alaska but then mentions Bahamas instead of Alaska in the next part of the argument. So, clearly wrong.
(C) If Joe were over 40 (if X) he would not want to learn to ski (not Y). Therefore, the fact that he does not want to learn to ski (since not Y) shows that he is over 40 (so X). Incorrect
(D) If Mark were a good cook (if X), he would not put cinnamon in the chili (not Y). Therefore, the fact that he is not a good cook (since not X) shows that he put cinnamon in the chili (so Y). Incorrect
(E) If Sally were sociable (if X), she would not avoid her friends (not Y). Therefore, the fact that she is sociable (since X) shows that she does not avoid her friends (so not Y). Incorrect
