That gadget I bought for the kitchen last week has already broken. It’

Question

That gadget I bought for the kitchen last week has already broken. It’s just another example of the shoddy products that we are seeing more and more of these days. The thing was probably manufactured in East Golo.

Which one of the following is the best expression of an unstated premise that underlies the author’s reasoning in the passage?

(A) If a manufacturer uses shoddy materials to make a gadget, the gadget is likely to break quickly.

(B) If a gadget breaks quickly, it was probably manufactured in East Golo.

(C) If a kitchen gadget was manufactured in East Golo, it should not be sold in this country.

(D) If everything that is manufactured in East Golo breaks quickly, then kitchen gadgets manufactured in East Golo are likely to break quickly.

(E) Nothing that is manufactured in East Golo can be expected to last more than a week

GMATNinja · Accepted Answer

The author first provides us with a fact: "That gadget I bought for the kitchen last week has already broken."

Then, he/she connects it to a general trend: "It’s just another example of the shoddy products that we are seeing more and more of these days."

Finally, the author throws out a claim: "The thing was probably manufactured in East Golo."

Notice that there's really  no support provided for that final claim.  Why the heck does the author think that this thing came from East Golo? That's what we're trying to find in the answer choices -- an unstated premise that underlies the author’s reasoning.

(A) specifies that shoddy materials are the main issue. But the author doesn't care about what, exactly, made the product break -- it could be materials, or poor assembly, or anything else. Singling out shoddy materials doesn't help us connect the dots and understand why the author thinks that the gadget comes from East Golo.

Eliminate (A).

This provides exactly the support that we need! The author relies on an unstated idea that the gadget is likely from East Golo because it broke quickly. (B) connects the dots from the fact at the beginning to the claim at the end.

Keep (B).

The author doesn't make any statements about what  should  happen -- he/she only makes a claim of what probably DID happen. So, (C) isn't a premise that underlies the author's argument.

Get rid of (C).

This doesn't quite connect the dots in the argument. The author has a broken gadget, and we're trying to understand why he/she believes it comes from East Golo.

(D) gives us a hypothetical about East Golo -- what if everything from there breaks quickly? Then the kitchen gadgets from there would break quickly. The issue is that we have no evidence that everything that is manufactured in East Golo breaks quickly, so we have no idea if the bit about the kitchen gadgets follows.

(D) is out.

(E) flips the logic of the passage. Saying that gadgets that DO break are probably from East Golo is different than saying that EVERYTHING from East Golo breaks.

Imagine this scenario: 100 things are manufactured in East Golo, and 5 of them break within a week. 100 things are manufactured elsewhere, and none of them break within a week.

In this scenario, you can claim that something that breaks is probably from East Golo, even if not  everything  from East Golo breaks. After all, 95 things from East Golo didn't break!

That's why (E) is not a premise underlying the author's argument, and (B) is the correct answer.

sujaygmat · Answer

Why the answer can’t be A?

Posted from my iPad

Carcass · Answer

(A) If a manufacturer uses shoddy materials to make a gadget, the gadget is likely to break quickly.

we do not know this for sure about the manufacture: maybe the company has a good production process that we do not know for sure if bad material=bad product result.

A bad question for sure.

A serious assumption question would never repeat the same words (at least not in the same fashion) of the stimulus in the answer choices.

Among other things.

Regards

Antharas · Answer

How the answer can be B, if it just repeats the phrase from the original passage, adding no value or any additional information, which would be helpful to find out the premise.

Posted from my mobile device

ChrisJ · Answer

Why can't it be E? I was confused between the answer options B and E and chose E over B for the simple fact that B was more obvious than to be considered a hidden or unstated premise.

Posted from my mobile device

rosalynd · Answer

The author says that the gadget broke quickly due to being poorly made and suggests that it was  likely  manufactured in East Golo. Hence, the author draws a conclusion that the gadget  probably  came from East Golo, based on the fact that it broke quickly. The unstated premise underlying the author's reasoning is that  if a gadget breaks quickly, it is likely to have been manufactured in East Golo .

B says: if a gadget breaks quickly, it is  probably  from East Golo.  
That's exactly what the author assumes.

E says: if  something  is from East Golo, it will break  in one week .

This goes beyond the scope and makes an extreme claim that everything manufactured in East Golo cannot be expected to last more than a week.

sanchitb23 · Answer

There is no Official Explanation for this Question, Kindly help with one as no proper explanation for this Question is provided

MartyTargetTestPrep · Answer

Notice that the author concludes that the gadget "was probably manufactured in East Golo" without providing any information about East Golo in connection with shoddy products that break.

So, to arrive at that conclusion, the author must be assuming that there is some connection between East Golo and shoddy products.

(B) states exactly what the author is assuming. To conclude that a product was probably manufactured in East Golo from the evidence that it broke easily, the author must assume that, as (B) says, if a gadget breaks quickly, it was probably manufactured in East Golo.

unraveled · Answer

That gadget I bought for the kitchen last week has already broken. It’s just another example of the shoddy products that we are seeing more and more of these days. The thing was probably manufactured in East Golo.

Which one of the following is the best expression of an unstated premise that underlies the author’s reasoning in the passage?

(A) If a manufacturer uses  shoddy materials  to make a gadget, the gadget is likely to break quickly. - WRONG. Material aspect is out of scope.

(B) If a gadget breaks quickly, it was probably manufactured in East Golo. - CORRECT.

(C) If a kitchen gadget was manufactured in East Golo, it should  not be sold in this country . - WRONG. Selling is irrelevant.

(D) If  everything  that is manufactured in East Golo breaks quickly, then kitchen gadgets manufactured in East Golo are likely to break quickly. - WRONG. Only issue is with the extreme word "everything". Takes scope beyond that of passage.

(E)  Nothing  that is  manufactured in East Golo can be expected  to last more than a week - WRONG. Almost there but the extreme word "nothing" ruins it and it's like D only.

Answer B.

yipmewmew · Answer

(D) gives us a hypothetical about East Golo -- what if everything from there breaks quickly? Then the kitchen gadgets from there would break quickly. The issue is that we have no evidence that everything that is manufactured in East Golo breaks quickly, so we have no idea if the bit about the kitchen gadgets follows.

(D) is out.

HI  GMATNinja 
Isnt D also wrong for the very same reason that it provides no link between how a broken gadget can be for sure from East Golo? What does having "no evidence' mean in your explanation.

GMATNinja · Answer

The evidence is that the gadget broke quickly. The conclusion is that the gadget was manufactured in East Golo. So we want evidence that  if  an object breaks quickly,  then  it was manufactured in East Golo.

(D) merely tells us that  if  an object is manufactured East Golo,  then  it will likely break quickly. But the whole point is that we have no evidence that the object was manufactured in East Golo! That's the thing we're trying to establish.

Put another way: we're not trying to figure out whether we should buy something from East Golo -- (D) might be useful for that. We're trying to figure out if this broken gadget was, in fact, manufactured in East Golo. And (D) gives us no evidence that would help determine that.

I hope that clears things up!

arushi118 · Answer

E is very string as an answer -> we cannot be sure that there is nothing manufactured in East Golo that lasts over a week because it is possible that atleast few products manufactured there last over a week (can also be just 8 days - not necessarily required that those products last over a long time)

That gadget I bought for the kitchen last week has already broken. It’

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

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

That gadget I bought for the kitchen last week has already broken. It’

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