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.
Sep 1001:00 AM EDT
-02:00 AM EDT
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and more.
Sep 0410:00 AM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
We’ve worked incredibly hard to build TTP into the best test prep experience possible, and it would mean a lot to us to win Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep. If TTP has helped you, we’d be incredibly grateful for your vote.
Sep 0812:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
Looking for your GMAT motivation to break through the score plateau? Pragati improved her score by massive 160 points with strategic guidance and hard-work! Find out how personalized mentorship and a strong mindset can turn GMAT struggles into success.
Sep 0907:00 AM PDT
-10:00 AM PDT
Meet AdComs and explore top Master’s programs - MiM, MiF, MSc, MSBA and more. - Application Fee Waivers - Free 1-Week of GMAT Club Tests: - Master's Application Toolkit - Grand Prize Giveaway- Sep 09
10:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Three MBA applications. Three rejections. No interview invites. A year later, Aman was admitted to Cambridge Judge, SMU, and IMD. In this episode of MBA Admit Stories, Aman shares how he rebuilt his MBA application... 
Sep 1008:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Sep 1507:00 PM EDT
-09:00 PM EST
Elite scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Tues/Thurs Sept. 15, 2026 - Nov. 15, 2027, 7:00pm-9:00pm EST
Sep 2107:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Boost your GMAT score in less than one month in a live online class + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Mon, Tues, Wed, Thur, Fri Sept. 21, 2026 - Oct. 9, 2027, 7:00pm-10:00pm EST
31 Aug 2011, 12:08
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi,
Just finished Kaplan Premier 2012 CR part and am having a bit of trouble grasping the denial test. Perhaps just writing it out will help me...
Anyway, we start with the argument (it must be an argument question, correct?) and then go through each answer (or at least the answers we have them narrowed down to) and negate it. Then we see if the argument holds true.
It just seems awfully convoluted to me and it's hard for me to keep flip flopping this in my head. Even re-reading the explanation doesn't make sense to me.
Luckily I got the assumption types right in the CR quiz so maybe it's just not worth my time delving deeper into this.
Just finished Kaplan Premier 2012 CR part and am having a bit of trouble grasping the denial test. Perhaps just writing it out will help me...
Anyway, we start with the argument (it must be an argument question, correct?) and then go through each answer (or at least the answers we have them narrowed down to) and negate it. Then we see if the argument holds true.
It just seems awfully convoluted to me and it's hard for me to keep flip flopping this in my head. Even re-reading the explanation doesn't make sense to me.
Luckily I got the assumption types right in the CR quiz so maybe it's just not worth my time delving deeper into this.
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Verbal Questions Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block below for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
01 Sep 2011, 11:07
Kudos
Bookmarks
This technique is designed to help you see which assumptions are necessary to an argument. The idea is that if the assumption is negated, the argument should no longer make sense. Let's look at an example:
Tigers are carnivores.
Elephants are herbivores.
Therefore tigers are more dangerous than elephants.
The argument depends on which of the following assumptions?
A) Some herbivores are highly dangerous.
B) Carnivores are more dangerous than herbivores.
C) Tigers are the most dangerous animal in existence.
D) Elephants are not dangerous.
E) Some carnivores are more dangerous than others.
Looking at these choices, we might conclude that B,C, and D all support the argument. What happens when we negate these choices?
A) The negation is "No herbivores are highly dangerous." Negating this answer would actually strengthen our argument. We can cross this one out. (Note that it's not unusual to see this sort of tempting wrong-direction choice as answer A).
B) The negation is "Carnivores are not more dangerous than herbivores." If that's true, then we have no reason to conclude that tigers are more dangerous than elephants. B is a necessary assumption.
C) The negation is "Tigers are not the most dangerous animal in existence." If that is true, tigers still might be more dangerous than elephants. This choice would make a great "strengthen" answer, but it is not necessary to validate the conclusion. We can cross it out.
D) The negation is "Elephants are dangerous." This seems to go against our argument, but it doesn't tell us how dangerous they are in comparison to tigers, so it doesn't knock out our conclusion. Again, this would help to strengthen the argument, but it is not necessary in order to reach the conclusion. D is out.
E) The negation is "All carnivores are equally dangerous." Okay, but are they more dangerous than herbivores (specifically elephants)? We don't know, so this has no effect on pour argument. This is a classic Variation Trap. The GMAT loves to throw this kind of thing in to make us say "Hmm . . . I wonder if that makes a difference." It makes no difference. If B is true, then we know tigers are more dangerous than elephants. We just don't know if they are more dangerous than other carnivores. If B is not true, then this information doesn't matter, as we have no basis for comparison.
In this case, you might have seen right away that B filled the logic gap, in which case you wouldn't need to run these negations. However, practicing them might prove helpful for those tricky situations when you're down to 2 choices and you just can't see what makes one wrong and the other right. Try doing this when you're reviewing your work, and you should find that you get much faster and more effective at all assumption-based arguments (Assumption, Strengthen, Weaken, Flaw, Evaluate the Argument).
I hope this helps!
Tigers are carnivores.
Elephants are herbivores.
Therefore tigers are more dangerous than elephants.
The argument depends on which of the following assumptions?
A) Some herbivores are highly dangerous.
B) Carnivores are more dangerous than herbivores.
C) Tigers are the most dangerous animal in existence.
D) Elephants are not dangerous.
E) Some carnivores are more dangerous than others.
Looking at these choices, we might conclude that B,C, and D all support the argument. What happens when we negate these choices?
A) The negation is "No herbivores are highly dangerous." Negating this answer would actually strengthen our argument. We can cross this one out. (Note that it's not unusual to see this sort of tempting wrong-direction choice as answer A).
B) The negation is "Carnivores are not more dangerous than herbivores." If that's true, then we have no reason to conclude that tigers are more dangerous than elephants. B is a necessary assumption.
C) The negation is "Tigers are not the most dangerous animal in existence." If that is true, tigers still might be more dangerous than elephants. This choice would make a great "strengthen" answer, but it is not necessary to validate the conclusion. We can cross it out.
D) The negation is "Elephants are dangerous." This seems to go against our argument, but it doesn't tell us how dangerous they are in comparison to tigers, so it doesn't knock out our conclusion. Again, this would help to strengthen the argument, but it is not necessary in order to reach the conclusion. D is out.
E) The negation is "All carnivores are equally dangerous." Okay, but are they more dangerous than herbivores (specifically elephants)? We don't know, so this has no effect on pour argument. This is a classic Variation Trap. The GMAT loves to throw this kind of thing in to make us say "Hmm . . . I wonder if that makes a difference." It makes no difference. If B is true, then we know tigers are more dangerous than elephants. We just don't know if they are more dangerous than other carnivores. If B is not true, then this information doesn't matter, as we have no basis for comparison.
In this case, you might have seen right away that B filled the logic gap, in which case you wouldn't need to run these negations. However, practicing them might prove helpful for those tricky situations when you're down to 2 choices and you just can't see what makes one wrong and the other right. Try doing this when you're reviewing your work, and you should find that you get much faster and more effective at all assumption-based arguments (Assumption, Strengthen, Weaken, Flaw, Evaluate the Argument).
I hope this helps!
Archived Topic
Hi there,
This topic has been closed and archived due to inactivity or violation of community quality standards. No more replies are possible here.
Where to now? Join ongoing discussions on thousands of quality questions in our Verbal Questions Forum
Still interested in this question? Check out the "Best Topics" block above for a better discussion on this exact question, as well as several more related questions.
Thank you for understanding, and happy exploring!
Moderators:
