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 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.
11 Sep 2019, 04:09
Kudos
Bookmarks
B
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% (02:11) correct
47%
(02:26)
wrong
based on 433
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Even in ancient times, specialized farms (farms that grow a single type of crop or livestock) existed only where there were large commercial markets for farm products, and such markets presuppose urban populations. Therefore the extensive ruins in the archaeological site at Kadishim are probably the remains of a largely uninhabited ceremonial structure rather than of a densely populated city, since the land in the region of Kadshim could never have supported any farms except mixed farms, which grow a variety of crops and livestock.
Which one of the following is an error of reasoning in the argument?
(A) taking the fact that something is true of one sample of a class of things as evidence that the same is true of the entire class of things
(B) taking the nonexistence of something as evidence that a necessary precondition for that thing also did not exist
(C) interpreting an ambiguous claim in one way in one part of the argument and in another way in another part of the argument
(D) supposing that because two things usually occur in conjunction with one another, one of them must be the cause of the other
(E) drawing a conclusion that is simply a restatement of one of the premises on which the argument is based
Which one of the following is an error of reasoning in the argument?
(A) taking the fact that something is true of one sample of a class of things as evidence that the same is true of the entire class of things
(B) taking the nonexistence of something as evidence that a necessary precondition for that thing also did not exist
(C) interpreting an ambiguous claim in one way in one part of the argument and in another way in another part of the argument
(D) supposing that because two things usually occur in conjunction with one another, one of them must be the cause of the other
(E) drawing a conclusion that is simply a restatement of one of the premises on which the argument is based
16 Sep 2019, 21:07
Kudos
Bookmarks
Bunuel
Reading this, one realises that just because cities are required for specialized farms doesn't mean there has to be a farm next to every city.
The only two options that came close to this understanding were:
Quote:
Here, D is not correct because these two don't occur in conjunction, one is actually a necessary precondition.
Hence B.
16 Apr 2021, 08:42
Kudos
Bookmarks
Bunuel
This is a tough one, and it's between B and D.
(B) taking the nonexistence of something (land that is suitable for specialized farms) as evidence that a necessary precondition (dense urban population) for that thing also did not exist. -sounds OK to me..
(D) supposing that because two things (i.e, 1. specialized farms & 2. dense urban population) usually occur in conjunction with one another, one of them must be the cause of the other -is the argument really saying that one is the cause of other? NO.
Option B is better.
