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 2308:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Video explanations + diagnosis of 10 weakest areas + 150+ short videos + study plan!
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 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 Jan 2026, 07:31
Kudos
Bookmarks
E
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
95%
(hard)
Question Stats:
36% (02:03) correct
64%
(01:52)
wrong
based on 74
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Which of the choices most logically completes the following argument?
Courts should carefully evaluate the circumstances of each couple before mandating reconciliation efforts. They often favor encouraging reconciliation between couples in divorce proceedings to avoid unnecessary dissolutions of marriages. Estranged couples who are actively avoiding contact likely have significant unresolved issues that may not be amenable to mediation in a court setting. Rehashing old arguments in a formal setting can inflame tensions and make it harder for them to communicate productively. What must, of course, courts do, in order to avoid a probable effort aimed at encouraging a court-mandated reconciliation to backfire in cases of severely estranged couples is to __________.
Courts should carefully evaluate the circumstances of each couple before mandating reconciliation efforts. They often favor encouraging reconciliation between couples in divorce proceedings to avoid unnecessary dissolutions of marriages. Estranged couples who are actively avoiding contact likely have significant unresolved issues that may not be amenable to mediation in a court setting. Rehashing old arguments in a formal setting can inflame tensions and make it harder for them to communicate productively. What must, of course, courts do, in order to avoid a probable effort aimed at encouraging a court-mandated reconciliation to backfire in cases of severely estranged couples is to __________.
A. prioritize a fair and respectful resolution for both parties that focuses on separation or parenting plans
B. mandate counseling for couples regardless of their willingness to participate
C. cajole the less-estranged partner to convince the other to participate in reconciliation
D. offer reconciliation resources only if both partners explicitly request them
E. mandate third-party mediation outside the courtroom setting for reconciliation or separation
10 Jan 2026, 07:56
Kudos
Bookmarks
The Argument Structure
Premise 1: Courts often favor encouraging reconciliation to avoid unnecessary divorces.
Premise 2: For severely estranged couples (those actively avoiding contact), unresolved issues might not be fixable in court-mediated settings.
Premise 3: Forced "re-hashing" of arguments in a formal setting can actually inflame tensions and destroy any chance of productive communication.
Conclusion (to be completed): To prevent a court-mandated reconciliation effort from backfiring in these severe cases, courts must __________.
The Core Logic
The argument warns that forcing a specific group (severely estranged couples) into reconciliation processes can make things worse (backfire). Therefore, the logical completion must provide an alternative path that avoids this "backfire" by shifting the focus away from forcing a reconciliation that isn't working.
Answer Choice Analysis
A. Correct. If the goal is to avoid the "backfire" of inflamed tensions caused by forced reconciliation, the court should pivot to a different objective: a fair and respectful resolution focused on the reality of the situation (separation or parenting plans). This avoids the toxic re-hashing of the marriage itself.
B. Incorrect. This directly contradicts the premise. The text says that formal settings can "inflame tensions." Mandating counseling regardless of willingness is the definition of a mandated effort that would likely backfire.
C. Incorrect. "Cajoling" one partner to pressure the other would almost certainly increase tension and conflict, leading to the exact "backfire" the argument warns against.
D. Incorrect. While this sounds reasonable in real life, it’s too restrictive for this specific argument. The argument doesn't say courts should never offer resources unless asked; it says they should avoid a "probable effort aimed at encouraging... reconciliation" in cases where it will backfire. D focuses on the offering of resources, whereas the argument is about the mandating of the process.
E. Incorrect. The argument states that rehashing old arguments "in a formal setting" is the problem. While a third party is "outside the courtroom," it is still a "formal setting" mandated by the court, and if the focus remains on reconciliation for a severely estranged couple, the risk of inflaming tensions remains.
Premise 1: Courts often favor encouraging reconciliation to avoid unnecessary divorces.
Premise 2: For severely estranged couples (those actively avoiding contact), unresolved issues might not be fixable in court-mediated settings.
Premise 3: Forced "re-hashing" of arguments in a formal setting can actually inflame tensions and destroy any chance of productive communication.
Conclusion (to be completed): To prevent a court-mandated reconciliation effort from backfiring in these severe cases, courts must __________.
The Core Logic
The argument warns that forcing a specific group (severely estranged couples) into reconciliation processes can make things worse (backfire). Therefore, the logical completion must provide an alternative path that avoids this "backfire" by shifting the focus away from forcing a reconciliation that isn't working.
Answer Choice Analysis
A. Correct. If the goal is to avoid the "backfire" of inflamed tensions caused by forced reconciliation, the court should pivot to a different objective: a fair and respectful resolution focused on the reality of the situation (separation or parenting plans). This avoids the toxic re-hashing of the marriage itself.
B. Incorrect. This directly contradicts the premise. The text says that formal settings can "inflame tensions." Mandating counseling regardless of willingness is the definition of a mandated effort that would likely backfire.
C. Incorrect. "Cajoling" one partner to pressure the other would almost certainly increase tension and conflict, leading to the exact "backfire" the argument warns against.
D. Incorrect. While this sounds reasonable in real life, it’s too restrictive for this specific argument. The argument doesn't say courts should never offer resources unless asked; it says they should avoid a "probable effort aimed at encouraging... reconciliation" in cases where it will backfire. D focuses on the offering of resources, whereas the argument is about the mandating of the process.
E. Incorrect. The argument states that rehashing old arguments "in a formal setting" is the problem. While a third party is "outside the courtroom," it is still a "formal setting" mandated by the court, and if the focus remains on reconciliation for a severely estranged couple, the risk of inflaming tensions remains.
18 Jan 2026, 11:26
Kudos
Bookmarks
E, focus on "Rehashing old arguments in a formal setting", so answer must be a place that is not formal i.e: outside of courtoom
