It is currently 28 Jun 2017, 16:24

### 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

# Which of the following most logically completes the

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Joined: 03 Jul 2006
Posts: 480
Which of the following most logically completes the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2006, 11:12
1
KUDOS
13
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

15% (low)

Question Stats:

74% (02:19) correct 26% (01:32) wrong based on 1175 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review, 2nd Edition

Practice Question
Question No.: 65
Page: 142
Difficulty:

Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades economic stagnation and restrictive regulations inhibited investment in new oild fields. In consequence, Utrania oil exports dropped steadily as old fields became depleted. Utrania's currently improving economic condition, together with less restrictive regulations, will undoubtedly result in the rapid development of new fields. However, it would be premature to conclude that the rapid development of new fields will result in higher oil exports, because:

A. the price of oil is expected to remain relatively stable over the next several years.

B. the improvement in the economic situation in Utrania is expected to result in a dramatic increase in the proportion of Utranian's who own automobiles.

C. most of the investment in the oil fields in Utrania is expected to come from foreign sources.

D. new technology is available to recover oil from old oil fields formerly regarded as depleted.

E. many of the new oil fields in Utrania are likely to be as productive as those that were developing during the period when Utrania was a major oil exporter.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
Intern
Joined: 02 Oct 2010
Posts: 21
Which of the following most logically completes the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Dec 2012, 21:25
2
KUDOS
Which of the following most logically completes the arguement?

Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades economic stagnation and restrictive regulations inhibited investment in new oil fields. In consequence, Utranian oil exports dropped steadily as old fields became depleted. Utrania's currently improving economic situation, together with less-restrictive regulations, will undoubtedly result in the rapid development of new fields. However, it would be premature to conclude that the rapid developemtn of new fields will result in higher oil exports, because

A. the price of oil is expected to remain relatively stable over the next several years.
B. the improvement in the economic situation in Utrania is expected to result in a dramatic increase in the proprtion of Utranians who own automobiles.
C. most of the investment in new oil fields in Utrania is expected to come from foreign sources
D. new technology is available to recover oil from old oil fields formerly regarded as depleted.
E. many of the new oil fields in Utrania are likely to be as productive as those that were developed during the period when Utrania was a major oil exporter.

My question here is about the question stem. Under what category does this question fall? Is it an assumption question stem??
Can somebody explain the strategy for tackling these kind of questions?

Thanks

Last edited by krackgmat on 11 Dec 2012, 22:32, edited 1 time in total.
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7449
Location: Pune, India

### Show Tags

12 Dec 2012, 04:49
2
KUDOS
Expert's post
krackgmat wrote:
Which of the following most logically completes the arguement?

Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades economic stagnation and restrictive regulations inhibited investment in new oil fields. In consequence, Utranian oil exports dropped steadily as old fields became depleted. Utrania's currently improving economic situation, together with less-restrictive regulations, will undoubtedly result in the rapid development of new fields. However, it would be premature to conclude that the rapid developemtn of new fields will result in higher oil exports, because

A. the price of oil is expected to remain relatively stable over the next several years.
B. the improvement in the economic situation in Utrania is expected to result in a dramatic increase in the proprtion of Utranians who own automobiles.
C. most of the investment in new oil fields in Utrania is expected to come from foreign sources
D. new technology is available to recover oil from old oil fields formerly regarded as depleted.
E. many of the new oil fields in Utrania are likely to be as productive as those that were developed during the period when Utrania was a major oil exporter.

Responding to a pm:

You are right. It is an easy B.

Go with the flow of the argument.
The last sentence says that development of new fields may not lead to higher exports because ...
It's a very basic question. Production is increasing but exports may not. Why? Because domestic demand may be higher now. You are looking for an option that says this.
B offers you a possible cause of increase in domestic demand so it logically completes the sentence.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for \$199

Veritas Prep Reviews

Manager
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 237
Re: ******OG Verbal Review - Question 65 ******** [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Dec 2012, 23:07
1
KUDOS
[quote="krackgmat"]Which of the following most logically completes the arguement?

Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades economic stagnation and restrictive regulations inhibited investment in new oil fields. In consequence, Utranian oil exports dropped steadily as old fields became depleted. Utrania's currently improving economic situation, together with less-restrictive regulations, will undoubtedly result in the rapid development of new fields. However, it would be premature to conclude that the rapid development of new fields will result in higher oil exports, because

A. the price of oil is expected to remain relatively stable over the next several years.
B. the improvement in the economic situation in Utrania is expected to result in a dramatic increase in the proprtion of Utranians who own automobiles.
C. most of the investment in new oil fields in Utrania is expected to come from foreign sources
D. new technology is available to recover oil from old oil fields formerly regarded as depleted.
E. many of the new oil fields in Utrania are likely to be as productive as those that were developed during the period when Utrania was a major oil exporter.

You can't say all complete the passage questions are weaken question, it all depends on whats going on it can be anything an assumption, strengthen, weaken etc in this particular question. We need to justify the reason why the statement in blue.

we have to ask ourselves why would it be premature to assume that rapid development will lead to higher exports?

This answer lies in the previous statement that it depends on the improvement in the economic situation. Now option B clearly says that the economic situation depends on some other factor and only when that factor is true,i.e. the proportion who own automobiles increases only then utrania will achieve economic prosperity.

This particular question is close to an assumption question cos we are looking for a missing premise.

Hope that helps!
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2101

### Show Tags

20 Jan 2013, 20:44
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
Marcab wrote:
Hii karishma.
Restating the argument: "it would be premature to conclude that the rapid developemtn of new fields will result in higher oil exports".
Two things are possible
1) there is an alternate way,apart from new fields, through which export can be increased.
2) there is no increase in exports at all.
Both the above options create a doubt that rapid development of new fields lead to higher exports.

Now D creates an alternate source(point 1) without making an assumption, whereas again saying B makes another assumption. Ask yourself, do the cars only run on fuels?

Now someone please let me know how my solution is incorrect.

Hi Marcab,

You have raised an interesting point here. Initially, I could not understand why you chose option D but after reading this post, I understand.

Let's understand the last line:

" it would be premature to conclude that the rapid development of new fields will result in higher oil exports, because"

Now, here you say that one thing possible is that " there is an alternate way,apart from new fields, through which export can be increased".

Well, even if there are alternate ways to increase exports, how does it make a conclusion premature that new fields will lead to increased exports.

An Analogy

Sometime analogies can be useful. Let's consider an analogy here:

It would be premature to say that eating one more apple a day will increase my height because I can increase height by drinking milk.

Is this argument correct? No. Why?

Because the guy is not saying that there is no other way to increase your height; He is just saying that eating an extra apple will increase my height.

Similarly, in this case, even if we say that there could be other sources through which higher exports could be achieved, we are not weakening the given argument.

Only way vs one of the ways

However, if the argument had said that

" it would be premature to conclude that the rapid development of new fields is the only way to achieve higher oil exports, because"

then we could have said that there are other avenues to increase exports, than only through new fields.

Therefore, option D is not correct.

Weakeners make assumptions

Now, regarding your other query that option B makes some assumptions. Again, a good point.

The idea is that almost all weakeners make some assumptions. There are not many weakeners, if you look at OG, which would conclusively disprove the conclusion just by their own. And in this question, we are looking for a weakener only.

Hope this helps

Feel free to ask in case of further queries.

-Chiranjeev
_________________

| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2101
Re: Which of the following most logically completes the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Jan 2013, 20:05
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
thangvietnam wrote:
Weakeners make assumptions

Now, regarding your other query that option B makes some assumptions. Again, a good point.

The idea is that almost all weakeners make some assumptions. There are not many weakeners, if you look at OG, which would conclusively disprove the conclusion just by their own. And in this question, we are looking for a weakener only.

Hope this helps

thank you e gmat for deep analysis.

I do not understand the above idea. Pls cite the og questions in which weakeners disprove the conclusion and in which weakener only weaken the conclusion. pls, cite only one question for each case. thank you very much.
I understand that if information shatters an assumption, it disproves the conclusion. if information increases doubt in an assumption, it increase doubt in the conclusion. The first is the destroyer, the second the weakner. both destroyer and weakner are correct answer for weakening question.

is my thinking correct?

Hi Thang.

Please find below an OG question where weakener doesn't disprove the conclusion. Or, in other words, it would require us to make assumptions to disprove the conclusion.

(Posted on according-to-the-tristate-transportation-authority-making-113718.html)
According to the Tristate Transportation Authority, making certain improvements to the main commuter rail line
would increase ridership dramatically. The authority plans to finance these improvements over the course of five
years by raising automobile tolls on the two high-way bridges along the route the rail line serves. Although the
proposed improvements are indeed needed, the authority’s plan for securing the necessary funds should be
rejected because it would unfairly force drivers to absorb the entire cost of something from which they receive no
benefit.

1.. Which of the following, if true, would cast the most doubt on the effectiveness of the authority’s plan to
finance the proposed improvements by increasing bridge tolls?
(A) Before the authority increases tolls on any of the area bridges, it is required by law to hold public hearings at
which objections to the proposed increase can be raised.
(B) Whenever bridge tolls are increased, the authority must pay a private contractor to adjust the automated
toll-collecting machines.
(C) Between the time a proposed toll increase is announced and the time the increase is actually put into effect,
many commuters buy more tokens than usual to postpone the effects of the increase.
(D) When tolls were last increased on the two bridges in question, almost 20 percent of the regular commuter
traffic switched to a slightly longer alternative route that has since been improved.
(E) The chairman of the authority is a member of the Tristate Automobile Club that has registered strong
opposition to the proposed toll increase.

The asnwer is Option D. One very obvious assumption required in this question is that past trends will be followed in the future too.

And below is the OG question where weakener does shatter the conclusion:
(Posted on unlike-the-wholesale-price-of-raw-wool-the-wholesale-price-93250.html)

Unlike the wholesale price of raw wool, the wholesale price of raw cotton has fallen considerably in the last Year.
Thus, although the retail price of cotton clothing at retail cloting stores has not yet fallen, it will inevitably fall.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?

A. The cost of processing raw cotton for cloth has increased during the last Year.
B. The wholesale price is typically higher than that of the same volume of raw cotton.
C. The operating costs of the average retail cloting store have remained constant during the last year.
D. Changes in retail prices always lag behind changes in wholesale prices.
E. The cost of harvesting raw cotton has increased in the last year.

Since, as per the weakener, the cost of processing raw cotton for cloth has increased during the last Year, we cannot say that "retail price of cotton will inevitably fall". It might or it might not fall (depends how much processing costs has increased).

As far as your reasoning goes, it is precisely right. Whether a statement increased doubt or shatters the conclusion, in both the cases, it is a weakener.

Hope this helps

Thanks,
Chiranjeev
_________________

| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Senior Manager
Joined: 03 Dec 2012
Posts: 339
Re: Which of the following most logically completes the [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Oct 2013, 02:06
1
KUDOS
The OA is B guys.... Its a straight B. I can see no other answer fitting the bill.
Manager
Joined: 16 Aug 2006
Posts: 66

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2006, 15:41
I will go with B.

The old and new oil field argument is just here to confuse the answers. The fact is - "... will undoubtedly result in the rapid development of new fields." With new fields developing the oil production will surely increase the total oil output. Unless of course if the oil produced is consumed locally...
VP
Joined: 21 Mar 2006
Posts: 1127
Location: Bangalore

### Show Tags

15 Sep 2006, 03:16
I narrowed it down to B and C.
I chose C.
Can anyone please explain why C is wrong?
VP
Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Posts: 1016

### Show Tags

15 Sep 2006, 03:49
kripalkavi wrote:
I narrowed it down to B and C.
I chose C.
Can anyone please explain why C is wrong?

It is an irrelevant statement. What if the investment comes from a foreign source? Still Utrania can be an exporter.

Utrania can't be an exporter because, all the oil is going to be consumed domestically.
_________________

The path is long, but self-surrender makes it short;
the way is difficult, but perfect trust makes it easy.

VP
Joined: 02 Jun 2006
Posts: 1260

### Show Tags

15 Sep 2006, 10:03
B. the improvement in the economic situation in Utrania is expected to result in a dramatic increase in the proportion of Utranian's who own automobiles

If the new oil fields generated oil is used internal to Utrania then the exports will not increase.
Director
Joined: 10 Oct 2005
Posts: 526
Location: US

### Show Tags

16 Sep 2006, 23:36
bit late ... straight B. If there is increase in domestic demand it will affect oil required for exports
VP
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1380
Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Re: ******OG Verbal Review - Question 65 ******** [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Dec 2012, 22:15
krackgmat wrote:
Which of the following most logically completes the arguement?

Utrania was formerly a major petroleum exporter, but in recent decades economic stagnation and restrictive regulations inhibited investment in new oil fields. In consequence, Utranian oil exports dropped steadily as old fields became depleted. Utrania's currently improving economic situation, together with less-restrictive regulations, will undoubtedly result in the rapid development of new fields. However, it would be premature to conclude that the rapid developemtn of new fields will result in higher oil exports, because

A. the price of oil is expected to remain relatively stable over the next several years.
B. the improvement in the economic situation in Utrania is expected to result in a dramatic increase in the proprtion of Utranians who own automobiles.
C. most of the investment in new oil fields in Utrania is expected to come from foreign sources
D. new technology is available to recover oil from old oil fields formerly regarded as depleted.
E. many of the new oil fields in Utrania are likely to be as productive as those that were developed during the period when Utrania was a major oil exporter.

My question here is about the question stem. Under what category does this question fall? Is it an assumption question stem??
Can somebody explain the strategy for tackling these kind of questions?

Thanks

Hii KrackGMAT.
I view these questions as Weaken questions.
Just try to put yourself with the flow of the stimulus.
The stimulus says:
1)Utrania was a mojor exporter but because of recession(or whatever) and some regulations, new investments in oil industry stopped. Result- Oil exports dropped.
2)Currently there is no recession and regulations are less strict, so companies are investing in the oil fields. Expected result- Rapid development of new fields.
Now there is a twist.
3) But it is not sure that the rapid development of new fileds will result in higher oil exports.

Now you have to complete the flow by giving reason why 3 is true. How can you do this? By providing an alternate cause.

D and B are close contenders, but D is better in that B makes some un-needed assumptions, though it will be great if we hear reasons why B is incorrect.
_________________
Intern
Joined: 02 Oct 2010
Posts: 21
Re: ******OG Verbal Review - Question 65 ******** [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Dec 2012, 22:33
I just updated the response in the spoiler as I misentered the correct answer previously.

An increase in car ownership would increase Utrania's Oil consumption, which could eat up the added oil production from the new fields.
VP
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1380
Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Re: ******OG Verbal Review - Question 65 ******** [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Dec 2012, 22:40
krackgmat wrote:
I just updated the response in the spoiler as I misentered the correct answer previously.

An increase in car ownership would increase Utrania's Oil consumption, which could eat up the added oil production from the new fields.

But here aren't you assuming that the automobiles run only on fuel; there can be an increase in the number of electric cars.
The second assumption one is making is that since the proportion of automobile owners has increased, the number of automobile owners has also increased. If I say that a number of Utranians who did not own automobiles left the country, then also the proportion of automobile owners increases but it will not eat up the oil.
_________________
VP
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1380
Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Re: ******OG Verbal Review - Question 65 ******** [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Dec 2012, 23:29
Hii nelz.
Don't you think that by selecting B, you are making some assumptions here; the cars only run on fuels and since the proportion increased so the number increased as well.
_________________
Manager
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 237
Re: ******OG Verbal Review - Question 65 ******** [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Dec 2012, 23:40
Marcab wrote:
Hii nelz.
Don't you think that by selecting B, you are making some assumptions here; the cars only run on fuels and since the proportion increased so the number increased as well.

Marcab,

The problem here is that rapid development of new fields this depends on improving economic situation. Now economic situation depends on some other condition, its important to note it may or may not happen. what happens if there is an increase in the proportion of automobiles this leads to economic conditions improvement and this leads to rapid development of new fields

now there is a second situation here,what happens if there isn't an increase in proportion of automobiles, then there isn't any economic improvement and then there won't be any improvement in development of new fields.

I believe you have classified this question incorrectly as a weaken question, instead it is trying to find an assumption on which the argument depends on ( in this particular assumption question its more restrictive)

point to note,it doesn't matter if its run on fuels its a situation that economic conditions depend on something else and only when the second condition is true it will be correct. It would be easier to explain with a diagram but I hope I have made the point clear.
VP
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1380
Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Re: ******OG Verbal Review - Question 65 ******** [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Dec 2012, 00:03
nelz007 wrote:
Marcab wrote:
Hii nelz.
Don't you think that by selecting B, you are making some assumptions here; the cars only run on fuels and since the proportion increased so the number increased as well.

Marcab,

The problem here is that rapid development of new fields this depends on improving economic situation. Now economic situation depends on some other condition, its important to note it may or may not happen. what happens if there is an increase in the proportion of automobiles this leads to economic conditions improvement and this leads to rapid development of new fields

now there is a second situation here,what happens if there isn't an increase in proportion of automobiles, then there isn't any economic improvement and then there won't be any improvement in development of new fields.

I believe you have classified this question incorrectly as a weaken question, instead it is trying to find an assumption on which the argument depends on ( in this particular assumption question its more restrictive)

point to note,it doesn't matter if its run on fuels its a situation that economic conditions depend on something else and only when the second condition is true it will be correct. It would be easier to explain with a diagram but I hope I have made the point clear.

Okay.
If I say that 1 million cars that run on electricity have been bought by Utranians, then wouldn't this fact prove that it is premature to conclude that the rapid developemtn of new fields will result in higher oil exports. IMO its yes.
Also there is a difference between proportion and number. What if a huge number of Utranians migrated to some other country when the economic condition of Utranian was not that good.

Moreover can you please explain "now there is a second situation here,what happens if there isn't an increase in proportion of automobiles, then there isn't any economic improvement and then there won't be any improvement in development of new fields".
_________________
Manager
Joined: 21 Sep 2012
Posts: 237
Re: ******OG Verbal Review - Question 65 ******** [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Dec 2012, 00:32
Marcab wrote:

Okay.
If I say that 1 million cars that run on electricity have been bought by Utranians, then wouldn't this fact prove that it is premature to conclude that the rapid developemtn of new fields will result in higher oil exports. IMO its yes.
Also there is a difference between proportion and number. What if a huge number of Utranians migrated to some other country when the economic condition of Utranian was not that good.

I don't think you have understood the argument well - B says inorder to gain economic improvement ppl will have to buy automobiles. when ppl buy automobiles there is income generated and this income is used for economic prosperity. Also note the argument is talking about EXPORTS it doesn't mention that its going to supply locally.

Marcab wrote:
Moreover can you please explain "now there is a second situation here,what happens if there isn't an increase in proportion of automobiles, then there isn't any economic improvement and then there won't be any improvement in development of new fields".

I took the opposite case of B - the improvement in the economic situation in Utrania is expected to result in a dramatic increase in the proprtion of Utranians who own automobiles.

if they don't buy automobiles then there isn't any improvement.

This is from the passage

Utrania's currently improving economic situation, together with less-restrictive regulations, will undoubtedly result in the rapid development of new fields.

so basically there are 2 situations which are needs for rapid development
1) improving economic situation
2) less restrictive regulations.

none of the answer choices mention restrictive regulations so we consider option 1 and this is present in choice B

Also regarding D - new technology is available to recover oil from old oil fields formerly regarded as depleted.

Here is my question to you? would you try to recover oil from a dried up oil field this process is expensive (low chances of getting oil, lots of risk) you might not get any oil if you do this.
Their best option is to look for new fields they have better chances of getting oil. D doesn't do anything to the argument in my opinion.

PS: this is an official question, there won't be any ambiguity here.
VP
Status: Been a long time guys...
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Posts: 1380
Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GPA: 3.75
Re: ******OG Verbal Review - Question 65 ******** [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Dec 2012, 00:45
nelz007 wrote:
I don't think you have understood the argument well - B says inorder to gain economic improvement ppl will have to buy automobiles. when ppl buy automobiles there is income generated and this income is used for economic prosperity. Also note the argument is talking about EXPORTS it doesn't mention that its going to supply locally.

Are you serious?
Does B-"the improvement in the economic situation in Utrania is expected to result in a dramatic increase in the proprtion of Utranians who own automobiles" implies that?
"The improvement in the economic situtation may result in the increase in the PROPORTION of Utranians who own automobiles". Where does it means that "in order to gain economic improvement, people will have to buy automobiles".
You have clearly assumed a lot.

Here is my question to you? would you try to recover oil from a dried up oil field this process is expensive (low chances of getting oil, lots of risk) you might not get any oil if you do this.
Nowhere its mentioned that recovering oil from a dried up oil field is an expensive process.
The only thing that D states is that a new technology is available to recover oil from oil fields that were earlier regarded as depleted.
_________________
Re: ******OG Verbal Review - Question 65 ********   [#permalink] 12 Dec 2012, 00:45

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 40 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
20 Which of the following most logically completes the 12 02 Jul 2016, 19:49
Which of the following most logically completes the 11 22 Mar 2012, 16:53
18 Which of the following most logically completes the 23 09 Jan 2016, 22:54
10 Which of the following most logically completes the 27 16 Apr 2016, 04:52
Which of the following most logically completes the 24 18 Jul 2012, 03:15
Display posts from previous: Sort by