Sociologist Duncan Mc naught is inconsistant in what he has

Question

Sociologist Duncan Mc naught is inconsistant in what he has to tell us about the causes of suicide.He has recently claimed that economic reasons , primarily unemployment often aggravated by alcoholism account for at least 75% of the increase in the rate of suicide in the past 10 years .How can he reconcile that with his opinion , expressed earlier in thesame lecture , that the isolation that results from the breakdown of a family is at the root of most suicides that occured last year.

The critism above is 

a) Valid because it cannot be true that most suicides are caused by isolation if most of them are caused by economicv factors
b)Valid because Mc Naught fails to specify the number of suicides that occured 10 years ago
c)Valid because unemployment & isolation can both be factors of the same suicide
d)Invalid because the author fails to mention that severe depression unrelated to unemployment or family problems can precipitate a suicide
e)Invalid because there is difference between the rate of suicide and the amount by which the rate has increased.


Explanations please.
Best.

ashkg · Answer

E.

Premise : unemployment caused 75% of the increase in the rate of suicide in the last 10 years.
Premise : family breakdown is the root cause of suicides last year.

Conclusion : Duncan is inconsistent in his talk

Suppose suicide rate was 2% 10 yrs back and 12% last year.
So increase in rate is 10%
Unemployment was the cause 75% of this 10%.

Whereas,

Family was the cause of the 12% of suicides.

So the doctor could be right and the criticism is invalid.  Best answer is E 

ABC are out as they say "valid"
D. Wrong because the author uses "75%" and "root of most suicides". He has never said there are no other causes.

E. delta(suicide rate) not = suicide rate

ywilfred · Answer

I'll go with E. The author confuses the two explanations by ignoring one is used to explain the increase in number of suicides, and the other to explain the number of suicides.

shalinikhatri · Answer

Answer E
suppose 1980 -- 10 out of 100 commited suicide
 1990-- 90 out of 100 commited suicide

so increase is 80 ; 75% of 80 = 60

from 1980 to 1988 eachyear an increase of 10 per 100 suicide 
and 1988 to 1990 no increase , the number remains stagnant

if 1980 to 1988 most of the suicides are because of economical reasons
from 1989 to 1990 the suicides are for family reasons at the same number

so family is not contributing towards rate increament

sonaketu · Answer

B,C,D are out. Out of A & E, E is the better

sparky · Answer

E.

sparky · Answer

E.

Arsene_Wenger · Answer

(E)....again, A,B,C, all out. (D) not close. it's (E)

jpv · Answer

Agree with (E). 

Key lies in the difference between "increase in the rate of suicide" and "most suicides i.e. number".

HIMALAYA · Answer

one more E, the only choice that can be deduce from the argument.

Sociologist Duncan Mc naught is inconsistant in what he has

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