A person’s failure to keep a promise is wrong only if, first, doing so

Question

A person’s failure to keep a promise is wrong only if, first, doing so harms the one to whom the promise is made and, second, all of those who discover the failure to keep the promise lose confidence in the person’s ability to keep promises.

Which one of the following judgments most closely conforms to the principle above?

(A) Ann kept her promise to repay Felicia the money she owned her. Further, this convinced everyone who knew Ann that she is trustworthy. Thus, Ann’s keeping her promise was not wrong.

(B) Jonathan took an oath of secrecy concerning the corporation’s technical secrets, but he sold them to a competitor. His action was wrong even though the corporation intended that he leak these secretes to its competitors.

(C) George promised to repay Reiko the money he owed her. However, George was unable to keep his promise to Reiko and as a result, Reiko suffered a serious financial loss. Thus, George’s failure to keep his promise was wrong.

(D) Because he lost his job, Carlo was unable to repay the money he promised to Miriam. However, Miriam did not need this money nor did she lose confidence in Carlo’s ability to keep promises. So, Carlo’s failure to keep his promise to Miriam was not wrong.

(E) Elizabeth promised to return the book she borrowed from Steven within a week. But she was unable to do so because she became acutely ill. Not knowing this, Steven lost confidence in her ability to keep a promise. So, Elizabeth’s failure to return the book to Steven was wrong.

shameekv1989 · Accepted Answer

A person’s failure to keep a promise is wrong only if, first, doing so harms the one to whom the promise is made and, second, all of those who discover the failure to keep the promise lose confidence in the person’s ability to keep promises.

Which one of the following judgments most closely conforms to the principle above?

Sufficient condition - Failure to keep promise
Necessary condition - Harms AND others lose confidence

Contrapositive :- No harm or others don't lose confidence -> Not a failure

A) Premise and conclusion is same - Anne kept promise therefore it was not wrong - Circular reasoning - Not what original argument is about -  Incorrect

B) Selling to competitor did not harm the company - a necessary condition for a promise to be a failure; additionally it needs a second condition in AND as well which is not mentioned -  Incorrect

C) Failure to keep promise -> Harmed Reiko; But the additional NC is misisng i.e. whether Reiko lost confidence in George -  Incorrect

D) Miriam was not harmed neither did he lose confidence -> Not a failure (Contrapositive condition) -  Correct

E) Steven lost confidence but was he harmed - we don't know - hence can not say whether E's failure was wrong -  Incorrect

yashikaaggarwal · Answer

A person’s failure to keep a promise is wrong -----> if, doing so harms the one to whom the promise is made ------> and rest who lose confidence in the person’s ability to keep promises.

Hence we can conclude intentionally broken promises are wrong

(A) Ann kept her promise to repay Felicia the money she owned her. Further, this convinced everyone who knew Ann that she is trustworthy. Thus, Ann’s keeping her promise was not wrong. ( Not justifying the crux of the passage as nothing mentioned regarding the creditor needed her money) ((crossed out))

(B) Jonathan took an oath of secrecy concerning the corporation’s technical secrets, but he sold them to a competitor. His action was wrong even though the corporation intended that he leak these secretes to its competitors. ( It's not justifying the crux of passage either as the company was itself going to sold the secret. It would have harmed the company no matter what, no trust relationship is established here) ((crossed out))

(C) George promised to repay Reiko the money he owed her. However, George was unable to keep his promise to Reiko and as a result, Reiko suffered a serious financial loss. Thus, George’s failure to keep his promise was wrong. ( Promise was not broken intentionally here, then we can conclude he didn't make his creditors loss intentionally, so it's not wrong) ((crossed out))

(D) Because he lost his job, Carlo was unable to repay the money he promised to Miriam. However, Miriam did not need this money nor did she lose confidence in Carlo’s ability to keep promises. So, Carlo’s failure to keep his promise to Miriam was not wrong.(broken promise got its justification, however breaking promise was not the intention but circumstances forced him so it won't be wrong) ((correct))

(E) Elizabeth promised to return the book she borrowed from Steven within a week. But she was unable to do so because she became acutely ill. Not knowing this, Steven lost confidence in her ability to keep a promise. So, Elizabeth’s failure to return the book to Steven was wrong. (Book returning promise won't make a dent in the actual life of book creditor, broken promise must held any specific loss to be put forward as wrong)((crossed out))

Hence IOC is D

Posted from my mobile device

IN2MBB2PE · Answer

Contrapositive :- No harm or others don't lose confidence -> Not a failure

Contrapositive for nor is "and", not "or"

Pretty sure you meant and ...

Correct will be: Not harm and Others Don't lose confidence and that's what D is saying ....

AlekhyaChappa · Answer

I didn't understand why A is incorrect.. Can someone explain..
 
All of those who discover the failure imply any outsider also who knew the situation??

dhart · Answer

A.) Ann kept her promise and paid Felicia -> Felicia had her trust in her and everyone was conviced she is a trustworthy person .It kind of follow an acceptable circular reasoning, but not what our argument is

B) Jonathan sole the company secrets , but company itself wanted jonathan to sell it, no trust was build between the parties and it did'nt cause harm

C) Failure to keep promise -> Harmed Reiko; but it was not intentional & the additional NC is misisng i.e. whether Reiko lost confidence in Geoege incorrect

D.) sound's correct by the contrapositive thoery i- > if A happends then B happens -> if No B has taken place, then A can be given off

E)eliz could'nt return book within one wek , she was ill , steven lost confidence in elizabeth ability to retun book , but was there any major loss if book returned afeter a day or two due to illness . Incorrect

Auro411 · Answer

Let's decode this structure:  If A (failure to keep a promise) is wrong only, if he had done B (harms the one) and C (those who lose their confidence in that person)

Let's look at the options and see if both B and C are there:

(A) This is a mistaken reversal situation, and secondly, there is nowhere mentioned that money could harm her if she failed the promise. Eliminate

(B) Action was wrong, given that the  C  thing that those person lose their confidence in it is absent. Eliminate

(C) His Second condition doesn't meet of losing faith in that person. Eliminate

(D) This is the contrapositive statement, which means If NOT B AND C, which is a necessary condition, then not A also, which is a sufficient condition, which makes this our answer.

(E) In this, there is no mention that failure to hold the promise did harm to the other person, even though the C condition is present.

A person’s failure to keep a promise is wrong only if, first, doing so

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

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

A person’s failure to keep a promise is wrong only if, first, doing so

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

My Rewards