Rodrigo: A number of commentators have recently opined that it is

Question

Rodrigo: A number of commentators have recently opined that it is strange that the public should generally show more sympathy for the rich than for the middle class, and have recommended that we allot the bulk of our sympathy for those who make a fraction of the amount made by a millionaire, since those who make millions have enough money to ease most of the real difficulties in life. I agree with these commentators, and will be glad to receive the public’s sympathy for my troubles getting a license for my new yacht, since I only make 7/8 of what a millionaire makes per year.

Which of the following best describes a flaw in Rodrigo’s reasoning?

A. He makes an inappropriate generalization when referring to a group. 
 B. The commentators he cites have not set a minimum and a maximum fractional value at which one can receive sympathy. 
 C. He is not a millionaire, so he cannot own a yacht. 
 D. He illicitly exploits a second incompatible meaning of a term. 
 E. He accepts a claim based on its source, not its merits.

This is a  CR Butler Question

Check the links to other Butler Projects:

Data Sufficiency Butler  
  Problem Solving Butler  
  Sentence Correction Butler  
  Reading Comprehension Butler  
  Integrated Reasoning Butler

shaurya_gmat · Answer

I am confused between A and D. Waiting for the OA.

EshaFatim · Answer

OPTION D

Here Rodrigo tries to equate his income, which is slightly less than a millionaire's (7/8 of a millionaire's income), to the intended meaning of those who ACTUALLY "make a fraction" of what a millionaire earns.

Thus, he misuses the idea of "fraction" to imply that his income level is close to deserving sympathy, despite the commentators’ actual intent being to sympathize with individuals who earn much less, likely in a much smaller fraction (not 7/8, but potentially far lower, like 1/10 or less). This manipulation of the term "fraction" is the flaw.

Bunuel · Answer

Official solution from Veritas Prep.

Solution: D 
 
 The difficulty in many Method of Reasoning questions is not in answering the question in your own words, but in translating your common sense answer into the pompous jargon favored in GMAT answer choices and reluctantly approximated here. Obviously the issue is that Rodrigo takes “a fraction” to mean “any fraction” when it more properly means “a small amount of” – remember that “a fraction” taken in the literal sense of “a numerical fraction” could mean ANY amount, including 100% of the original number – so look for an answer choice that stresses disingenuous manipulation of a term. In this case (D) fits the bill, as it has both the pieces we want: someone exploiting a double meaning. The unusual use of “illicit” is just there to confuse and frustrate you, but stick to your guns.

DonBosco7 · Answer

Oh man this one is funny 😄
Rodrigo is a hypocrite !

Rodrigo: A number of commentators have recently opined that it is

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

Rodrigo: A number of commentators have recently opined that it is

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