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.
10 May 2020, 11:26
Kudos
Bookmarks
D
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:
65% (01:48) correct
35%
(01:55)
wrong
based on 1178
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Lawyer: This witness acknowledges being present at the restaurant and watching when my client, a famous television personality, was assaulted. Yet the witness claims to recognize the assailant, but not my famous client. Therefore, the witness’s testimony should be excluded.
The lawyer’s conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?
(A) If a witness claims to recognize both parties involved in an assault, then the witness’s testimony should be included.
(B) There are other witnesses who can identify the lawyer’s client as present during the assault.
(C) It is impossible to determine whether the witness actually recognized the assailant.
(D) The testimony of a witness to an assault should be included only if the witness claims to recognize both parties involved in the assault.
(E) It is unlikely that anyone would fail to recognize the lawyer’s client.
The lawyer’s conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?
(A) If a witness claims to recognize both parties involved in an assault, then the witness’s testimony should be included.
(B) There are other witnesses who can identify the lawyer’s client as present during the assault.
(C) It is impossible to determine whether the witness actually recognized the assailant.
(D) The testimony of a witness to an assault should be included only if the witness claims to recognize both parties involved in the assault.
(E) It is unlikely that anyone would fail to recognize the lawyer’s client.
Akela
Witness recognises the assailant but not the victim.
Conclusion: Witness's testimony should be excluded.
Since the witness does not recognise one party, the lawyer wants to exclude the witness.
What is the assumption? that if a witness does not recognise at least one party, the testimony should be excluded. So basically it says that the witness should recognise both parties, only then his.her testimony should be included.
This is given in option (D) which is the answer.
(A) If a witness claims to recognize both parties involved in an assault, then the witness’s testimony should be included.
This is different from option (D). This tells you what one should do if a witness recognises both parties but does not tell you what to do if the witness recognises only one party.
This says that if a witness recognises both, include his testimony. But it doesn't say that include his testimony ONLY if he recognises both parties. So we don't know what one should do if he doesn't recognise one party.
Option (D) tells us that ONLY if the witness recognises both parties, should his testimony be included. This clarifies that in case he doesn't recognise one or both parties, his testimony should not be included.
We need to assume option (D) to be correct to make the conclusion follow.
Answer (D)
Conditional statements are discussed here: https://youtu.be/MmlwcTlHZz8
https://youtu.be/BW8Ijrhjjq8
https://youtu.be/yQYkL1DSslA
shameekv1989
GMAT 3: 720 Q50 V38
Posts: 816
14 May 2020, 13:22
Kudos
Bookmarks
Nikan
Nikan :-
Lawyer: This witness acknowledges being present at the restaurant and watching when my client, a famous television personality, was assaulted. Yet the witness claims to recognize the assailant, but not my famous client. Therefore, the witness’s testimony should be excluded.
The lawyer’s conclusion follows logically if which one of the following is assumed?
The passage says :-
Sufficient Condition -> Necessary condition :-
Witness does not recognize my client -> Testimony should not be included
Implies
Testimony should be included -> Witness recognizes
If P is true then Q is true
(A) If a witness claims to recognize both parties involved in an assault, then the witness’s testimony should be included.
Sufficient Condition :- witness claims to recognize
Necessary condition :- testimony included
(D) The testimony of a witness to an assault should be included only if the witness claims to recognize both parties involved in the assault.
Sufficient condition :- testimony included
Necessary condition :- witness claims to recognize
Only if is a marker for Necessary condition
If P then Q is a structure for If Suff Cond then Nec. Cond.
Option D is a direct contrapositive of the conclusion. For the conclusion to be true, its contrapositive must be true (thus an unstated premise - assumption)
whereas Option A is a condition where Sufficient condition and Necessary conditions are reversed, thus incorrect
