It is currently 25 Sep 2017, 11:59

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

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf

Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 17 Sep 2016
Posts: 190

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 29

Re: When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf and are [#permalink]

Show Tags

21 Sep 2016, 06:32
00:00

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

62% (01:14) correct 38% (02:11) wrong based on 479 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

anyone can explain further C, and D?
I have no idea about these errors in C and D, looks good for me.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 29

Manager
Joined: 17 Sep 2016
Posts: 190

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 29

Re: When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf and are [#permalink]

Show Tags

22 Sep 2016, 05:09
crazy.
I have problem to understand the logic of this argument.

anyone can help?
how the theorists come to the conclusion ? hard to figure out the link of the premise and conclusion

thanks a lot
have a nice day
>_~

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 29

Verbal Expert
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3139

Kudos [?]: 3125 [0], given: 22

Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf and are [#permalink]

Show Tags

22 Sep 2016, 09:26
zoezhuyan wrote:
crazy.
I have problem to understand the logic of this argument.

anyone can help?
how the theorists come to the conclusion ? hard to figure out the link of the premise and conclusion

thanks a lot
have a nice day
>_~

Let us suppose that the theorist’s explanation is right: The self indeed dissociates into 2 parts. In such case, the part that replies must be the one that hears the question (it’s not possible that the other part, the deaf one, hears the question since the deaf part cannot hear at all); hence it’s the hearing part, not the deaf part, that must have responded after hearing the question , and then the hearing part must have responded “yes”, not “no”, since the hearing part could actually hear the question…….hence answer is A..why the hearing part did not answer “yes”....if the theorist’s explanation were right, the subject should have answered “yes”.….(however there is an underlying assumption while selecting the option A : that the hearing part does not intentionally bluff !)

Further elaboration: -
The theorist is trying to say: the hearing part knows that there exists a deaf part that cannot hear and by replying “no”, the hearing part meant to say “the deaf part cannot hear”…well in that case we have to assume two almost absurd things: 1> The hearing part KNOWS there exists a deaf part, which cannot hear. 2> When asked “can YOU hear ?”, the hearing part mistakes the deaf part for itself and thinks “I am the deaf part and I CANNOT hear”…

Kudos [?]: 3125 [0], given: 22

Manager
Joined: 17 Sep 2016
Posts: 190

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 29

Re: When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf and are [#permalink]

Show Tags

23 Sep 2016, 03:56
sayantanc2k wrote:
Let us suppose that the theorist’s explanation is right: The self indeed dissociates into 2 parts. In such case, the part that replies must be the one that hears the question (it’s not possible that the other part, the deaf one, hears the question since the deaf part cannot hear at all); hence it’s the hearing part, not the deaf part, that must have responded after hearing the question , and then the hearing part must have responded “yes”, not “no”, since the hearing part could actually hear the question…….hence answer is A..why the hearing part did not answer “yes”....if the theorist’s explanation were right, the subject should have answered “yes”.….(however there is an underlying assumption while selecting the option A : that the hearing part does not intentionally bluff !)

Further elaboration: -
The theorist is trying to say: the hearing part knows that there exists a deaf part that cannot hear and by replying “no”, the hearing part meant to say “the deaf part cannot hear”…well in that case we have to assume two almost absurd things: 1> The hearing part KNOWS there exists a deaf part, which cannot hear. 2> When asked “can YOU hear ?”, the hearing part mistakes the deaf part for itself and thinks “I am the deaf part and I CANNOT hear”…

thanks sauantanc2K.

thanks you're patient.

I am still confused the argument.
self dissociated into hearing part and deaf part.
when subject is asked whether you can hear, no matter the answer is yes or no ,obviously, the response is used hearing part..

I cannot understand :
how arrive to the conclusion that the deaf part is dissociated from reply when subject answer No,
why get conclusion when answer is no,

the premise and the conclusion seem irrelevant. no matter the answer is yes or no.

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 29

Verbal Expert
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3139

Kudos [?]: 3125 [0], given: 22

Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf and are [#permalink]

Show Tags

23 Sep 2016, 09:26
zoezhuyan wrote:
sayantanc2k wrote:
Let us suppose that the theorist’s explanation is right: The self indeed dissociates into 2 parts. In such case, the part that replies must be the one that hears the question (it’s not possible that the other part, the deaf one, hears the question since the deaf part cannot hear at all); hence it’s the hearing part, not the deaf part, that must have responded after hearing the question , and then the hearing part must have responded “yes”, not “no”, since the hearing part could actually hear the question…….hence answer is A..why the hearing part did not answer “yes”....if the theorist’s explanation were right, the subject should have answered “yes”.….(however there is an underlying assumption while selecting the option A : that the hearing part does not intentionally bluff !)

Further elaboration: -
The theorist is trying to say: the hearing part knows that there exists a deaf part that cannot hear and by replying “no”, the hearing part meant to say “the deaf part cannot hear”…well in that case we have to assume two almost absurd things: 1> The hearing part KNOWS there exists a deaf part, which cannot hear. 2> When asked “can YOU hear ?”, the hearing part mistakes the deaf part for itself and thinks “I am the deaf part and I CANNOT hear”…

thanks sauantanc2K.

thanks you're patient.

I am still confused the argument.
self dissociated into hearing part and deaf part.
when subject is asked whether you can hear, no matter the answer is yes or no ,obviously, the response is used hearing part..

I cannot understand :
how arrive to the conclusion that the deaf part is dissociated from reply when subject answer No,
why get conclusion when answer is no,

the premise and the conclusion seem irrelevant. no matter the answer is yes or no.

The deaf part cannot hear at all - hence a person who cannot hear the question, would not reply. The answer therefore comes out the part who can hear the question. Thus the part that hears the question must say "yes",because it had heard the question.

If you still feel difficulty understanding this, I would suggest that you stop thinking about this question for some days. Come back and try to grasp it once more after 4-5 days. Post again if you still have problem at that time.

Kudos [?]: 3125 [0], given: 22

Manager
Joined: 17 Sep 2016
Posts: 190

Kudos [?]: 4 [1], given: 29

When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf and are [#permalink]

Show Tags

30 Sep 2016, 05:15
1
KUDOS
sayantanc2k wrote:
The deaf part cannot hear at all - hence a person who cannot hear the question, would not reply. The answer therefore comes out the part who can hear the question. Thus the part that hears the question must say "yes",because it had heard the question.

Hi sayantankc2k,

it seems to be clear after reading this thread, but I am not sure whether I really got the idea. please point out my fault.

Given one of the subjects is John

John's brain is divided into hearing part and deaf part.
under normal condition, hearing part answers only "YES" to reply, deaf part keeps silence and won't answer anything.

it must be from hearing part if answer only "YES",
it must be from deaf part if silence.
if must be from neither hearing part nor deaf part if answer "NO"

as premise says,
the answer is "NO", so get the idea that reply part, hearing part, and deaf part are independent each other,
so the conclusion is that the part that is deaf is dissociated from the part that replies.

if get answer "YES", then the deaf part must take use of hearing part under unawareness, so it imply that deaf part and hearing exchange information, and transfer to reply,

we can see that deaf transfer information to reply indirectly, deaf part and reply are not independent, they transfer information indirectly

so A weakens the independent relationship. Am I right?

only "YES" can be the answer through hearing part,
so "NO" is an incorrect condition/source, the stimulus's conclusion is based on an incorrect condition/source, that imply the conclusion is problematic,
if weaken , we just point the incorrect condition/source.

thanks a lot
have a nice day

>_~

Kudos [?]: 4 [1], given: 29

Verbal Expert
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3139

Kudos [?]: 3125 [0], given: 22

Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf [#permalink]

Show Tags

01 Oct 2016, 02:26
zoezhuyan wrote:
sayantanc2k wrote:
The deaf part cannot hear at all - hence a person who cannot hear the question, would not reply. The answer therefore comes out the part who can hear the question. Thus the part that hears the question must say "yes",because it had heard the question.

Hi sayantankc2k,

it seems to be clear after reading this thread, but I am not sure whether I really got the idea. please point out my fault.

Given one of the subjects is John

John's brain is divided into hearing part and deaf part.
under normal condition, hearing part answers only "YES" to reply, deaf part keeps silence and won't answer anything.

it must be from hearing part if answer only "YES",
it must be from deaf part if silence.
if must be from neither hearing part nor deaf part if answer "NO"

as premise says,
the answer is "NO", so get the idea that reply part, hearing part, and deaf part are independent each other,
so the conclusion is that the part that is deaf is dissociated from the part that replies.

if get answer "YES", then the deaf part must take use of hearing part under unawareness, so it imply that deaf part and hearing exchange information, and transfer to reply,

we can see that deaf transfer information to reply indirectly, deaf part and reply are not independent, they transfer information indirectly

so A weakens the independent relationship. Am I right?

only "YES" can be the answer through hearing part,
so "NO" is an incorrect condition/source, the stimulus's conclusion is based on an incorrect condition/source, that imply the conclusion is problematic,
if weaken , we just point the incorrect condition/source.

thanks a lot
have a nice day

>_~

Your understanding is very crisp and clear.

Kudos [?]: 3125 [0], given: 22

Manager
Joined: 17 Sep 2016
Posts: 190

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 29

When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf [#permalink]

Show Tags

03 Oct 2016, 03:34
sayantanc2k wrote:
Your understanding is very crisp and clear.

cuz had thought many times, I suspected myself even, afraid misunderstanding

have a nice day.
>_~

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 29

Senior Manager
Joined: 21 Aug 2016
Posts: 299

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 135

Location: India
GPA: 3.9
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf [#permalink]

Show Tags

22 Jul 2017, 02:32
chetan2u wrote:
Hi,

I am not getting the intended meaning of this question.

When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf and are then asked whether they can hear the hypnotist, they reply, “No.” Some theorists try to explain this result by arguing that the selves of hypnotized subjects are dissociated into separate parts, and that the part that is deaf is dissociated from the part that replies.
Which of the following challenges indicates the most serious weakness in the attempted explanation described above?
(A) Why does the part that replies not answer, “Yes”?
(B) Why are the observed facts in need of any special explanation?
(C) Why do the subjects appear to accept the hypnotist’s suggestion that they are deaf?
(D) Why do hypnotized subjects all respond the same way in the situation described?
(E) Why are the separate parts of the self the same for all subjects?

Thanks & regards,

lets see what does the Para tell us..

people who are hypnotized are told that they are deaf, which means they should not hear anything thereafter. But when asked whether they can hear the hypnotist, they say 'NO'.
We can say that they may say NO, but they are answering our Q. to this, the hypnotist reason that hypnotized subjects are dissociated into separate parts and that the part that is deaf is dissociated from the part that replies...

we have to find aweakness in this arguement..
(A) Why does the part that replies not answer, “Yes”?..
A tells us that if they are dissociated into separate parts and that the part that is deaf is dissociated from the part that replies, why doesn't it say 'YES'...
this means they can hear
Hope it helps

Hi chetan2u

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 135

Manager
Joined: 19 Dec 2016
Posts: 59

Kudos [?]: 42 [1], given: 51

Location: India
WE: Consulting (Computer Software)
When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf [#permalink]

Show Tags

22 Jul 2017, 05:26
1
KUDOS
hypnotized subjects means people who are, when hypnotized, being told by hypnotist that they are deaf. but even after that when hypnotist ask them that can you hear me they say 'NO', And for this behavior a reason has been given. if that reason is true and the person actually can not listen anyone or Answering NO is a random behavior,why do they not sometime respond with yes.

_________________

If you want to appreciate, just click on Kudos.

Kudos [?]: 42 [1], given: 51

When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf   [#permalink] 22 Jul 2017, 05:26
Display posts from previous: Sort by