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 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.
06 Sep 2021, 05:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
15%
(low)
Question Stats:
83% (02:00) correct
17%
(02:15)
wrong
based on 209
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
A building inspector has been accused of ignoring serious structural defects on a building. Although the records have been lost and the building has since been demolished, his inspections of more recent buildings have been reviewed and found to be flawless. Therefore, the accusation should be dismissed.
Which one of the following contains questionable reasoning that is similar to that in the argument above?
(A) A computer scientist was accused of spreading a computer virus to several large computers, but the charge should be dismissed since the hard drives of those computers have been erased and no record of his malfeasance exists. Also, since then, his work has been untainted by any such actions.
(B) A teacher was accused of allowing several students to pass a course when they actually failed. This accusation should be discussed at length because even though those students went on to be successful in later grades, the teacher may have passed other undeserving students.
(C) Politician A was accused of stealing parts of a speech given by Politician B. This charge is without foundation and should be disregarded because Politician A was not even born when Politician B gave that speech and there exists no recording of the original speech.
(D) A restaurateur is accused of using ingredients past their expiration dates. The accusation seems justified even though there is no evidence of it, because several cases of food poisoning can be linked back to the restaurateur’s place of business.
(E) A financial manager is accused of stealing funds from his clients. The charges should be ignored because even though the records show there has been some malfeasance, the identity of the accuser has not been disclosed.
Which one of the following contains questionable reasoning that is similar to that in the argument above?
(A) A computer scientist was accused of spreading a computer virus to several large computers, but the charge should be dismissed since the hard drives of those computers have been erased and no record of his malfeasance exists. Also, since then, his work has been untainted by any such actions.
(B) A teacher was accused of allowing several students to pass a course when they actually failed. This accusation should be discussed at length because even though those students went on to be successful in later grades, the teacher may have passed other undeserving students.
(C) Politician A was accused of stealing parts of a speech given by Politician B. This charge is without foundation and should be disregarded because Politician A was not even born when Politician B gave that speech and there exists no recording of the original speech.
(D) A restaurateur is accused of using ingredients past their expiration dates. The accusation seems justified even though there is no evidence of it, because several cases of food poisoning can be linked back to the restaurateur’s place of business.
(E) A financial manager is accused of stealing funds from his clients. The charges should be ignored because even though the records show there has been some malfeasance, the identity of the accuser has not been disclosed.
10 Sep 2021, 03:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
Bunuel
OFFICIAL EXPLANATION
Answer: A
STEP 1: Read the question and identify your task.
This is a Parallel question. This question is asking you to find the answer whose logic most resembles the given statements. That the reasoning is “questionable” is irrelevant to your task of just finding the answer that follows the same logic.
STEP 2: Read the argument with your task in mind.
In this case, a building inspector has been accused of a crime, the evidence has been lost or wiped out by an action, and thus, the argument recommends that the accusation be retracted.
STEP 3: Know what you’re looking for.
Again, that the reasoning is “questionable” is irrelevant to your task of just finding the answer that follows the same logic, questionable or not.
STEP 4: Read every word of every answer choice.
Answer A switches the statements around, giving the recommendation in the second statement, but the logic is essentially the same. The computer scientist has been accused of a crime and the accusation should be dismissed because all evidence of his crime (hard drives, records) has been eliminated. Answer B recommends that the teacher be further investigated and the evidence is still available, so this situation is very different from your inspector’s. Answer C is close but still not the best answer because the lack of evidence described is insufficient. People still may have heard the speech and be familiar with its content. Answer D argues to sustain the accusation that is supportable by some evidence, which is a completely different situation. Answer E argues that the accusation be retracted based on the lack of identity of the accuser rather than any insufficiency of evidence against the financial manager. The correct choice is answer A.
General Discussion
06 Sep 2021, 05:18
Kudos
Bookmarks
Premise: 1. Building Inspector was accused of ignoring structural issues
2. Building records have been lost & the building has been demolished
3. Current, inspections are flawless
Conclusion: So, the charges should be dropped.
We have to look for an option wherein somebody is accused of wrongdoing but proof of wrongdoing doesn't exist today, and his work has improved since then. The conclusion says that the charges against accuse should be dropped.
(A) A computer scientist was accused of spreading a computer virus to several large computers, but the charge should be dismissed since the hard drives of those computers have been erased and no record of his malfeasance exists. Also, since then, his work has been untainted by any such actions.
This matches with the reasoning presented in the argument.
(B) A teacher was accused of allowing several students to pass a course when they actually failed. This accusation should be discussed at length because even though those students went on to be successful in later grades, the teacher may have passed other undeserving students.
Here accusation is not dropped.
(C) Politician A was accused of stealing parts of a speech given by Politician B. This charge is without foundation and should be disregarded because Politician A was not even born when Politician B gave that speech and there exists no recording of the original speech.
Though recordings are not there but people may have heard the speech and drafted Politician A's speech accordingly.
(D) A restaurateur is accused of using ingredients past their expiration dates. The accusation seems justified even though there is no evidence of it, because several cases of food poisoning can be linked back to the restaurateur’s place of business.
Here accusation is being justified not dropped.
(E) A financial manager is accused of stealing funds from his clients. The charges should be ignored because even though the records show there has been some malfeasance, the identity of the accuser has not been disclosed.
Here the proof of wrongdoing still exists. Reject it.
IMO OA should be A.
2. Building records have been lost & the building has been demolished
3. Current, inspections are flawless
Conclusion: So, the charges should be dropped.
We have to look for an option wherein somebody is accused of wrongdoing but proof of wrongdoing doesn't exist today, and his work has improved since then. The conclusion says that the charges against accuse should be dropped.
(A) A computer scientist was accused of spreading a computer virus to several large computers, but the charge should be dismissed since the hard drives of those computers have been erased and no record of his malfeasance exists. Also, since then, his work has been untainted by any such actions.
This matches with the reasoning presented in the argument.
(B) A teacher was accused of allowing several students to pass a course when they actually failed. This accusation should be discussed at length because even though those students went on to be successful in later grades, the teacher may have passed other undeserving students.
Here accusation is not dropped.
(C) Politician A was accused of stealing parts of a speech given by Politician B. This charge is without foundation and should be disregarded because Politician A was not even born when Politician B gave that speech and there exists no recording of the original speech.
Though recordings are not there but people may have heard the speech and drafted Politician A's speech accordingly.
(D) A restaurateur is accused of using ingredients past their expiration dates. The accusation seems justified even though there is no evidence of it, because several cases of food poisoning can be linked back to the restaurateur’s place of business.
Here accusation is being justified not dropped.
(E) A financial manager is accused of stealing funds from his clients. The charges should be ignored because even though the records show there has been some malfeasance, the identity of the accuser has not been disclosed.
Here the proof of wrongdoing still exists. Reject it.
IMO OA should be A.
