What to expect on the gmat 4

Tham khảo tài liệu what to expect on the gmat 4, ngoại ngữ, anh ngữ phổ thông phục vụ nhu cầu học tập, nghiên cứu và làm việc hiệu quả
Nội dung trích xuất từ tài liệu:
What to expect on the gmat 4 – CRITICAL REASONING – Which of the following is the most serious weakness of this argument? a. It assumes that it is wrong to break tradition. b. It assumes that women should not have an equal opportunity. c. It assumes that including women would mean that everyone would have to be included without restriction. d. It does not acknowledge that men are included in some women’s tournaments. e. It does not explain why the tournament is such a renowned event. This argument has many problems, including the fact that in general, it does not offer any truly logicalreasons to support its conclusion. Of the options given, the best choice is c. This assumption is a slippery slopefallacy. Including women would not mean anyone could enter the tournament. This slippery slope is used asa sort of scare tactic to frighten off support for including women in the tournament. GMAT questions will often ask you to determine what evidence strengthens or weakens an argumentor what information would help you better evaluate an argument. Now that you have reviewed the elementsof evaluating arguments, take another look at this question from the pretest:13. DNA evidence has increasingly been used in court to prove guilt and to exonerate the innocent. Because so many convicted felons have been cleared by DNA evidence, all cases in which someone was convicted largely on circumstantial evidence should be called into question and reviewed. Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen this argument? a. One in three convictions today rests largely on DNA evidence. b. DNA evidence is admissible even after the statute of limitations has expired. c. Of every ten cases in which DNA evidence becomes available post-conviction, five convictions are overturned. d. DNA evidence is 99.8% accurate. e. DNA evidence is very difficult to falsify or tamper with. To answer this question, you need to evaluate each of the options. The key question is which choice isthe most relevant to the argument. As discussed earlier in this chapter, this is a controversial conclusion, soit should be backed by very strong evidence. Which of these claims provides the best support for theargument? The best choice is c. The fact that would most strengthen this argument is the percentage of cases inwhich DNA evidence overturned prior convictions. If a full half of all cases resulted in erroneous convictionsthat were later cleared by DNA evidence, then that should certainly draw other convictions into doubt. Thatmeans that potentially half of all felons have been wrongly convicted. The fact that one in three of today’s con-victions rest on DNA evidence has no bearing on prior convictions, so choice a is irrelevant. Similarly, theadmissibility of DNA evidence (choice b) has no bearing on the quality of prior convictions; it is also irrel-evant. That DNA evidence is accurate (choice d) and difficult to tamper with (choice e) strengthens the argu-ment for the use of DNA evidence in court, but it does not directly strengthen the argument that priorconvictions should be called into doubt. 103 – CRITICAL REASONING –E valuating ExplanationsMany of the critical reasoning questions on the GMAT exam will either present a scenario and ask you todetermine the best explanation for a phenomenon or offer an explanation and ask you to evaluate that expla-nation. Some special criteria must be considered when judging an explanation. A good explanation is basedon the following criteria: Testable. An explanation must be subject to testing. If the phenomenon is the only evidence for its ■ existence, then it is a poor explanation. If it cannot be tested for correctness, then you cannot deter- mine whether or not it is correct. If an explanation cannot be verified or refuted under any circum- stances, regard it with suspicion. Example: He knew what I was thinking because he has ESP. Although many have tried to prove that extra-sensory perception (ESP) exists, tests remain inconclu- sive. And how could you test whether or not this was true? If you test him for ESP and he fails, he could claim that he only uses his ESP powers when he wants to. This is an untestable explanation. Noncircular. If the phenomenon and the evidence/explanation for the phenomenon are essentially the ■ same, then you have a circular (and therefore unacceptable) explanation. (This works just the same as the circular reasoning logical fallacy.) Beware of any explanation that merely restates the phenomenon it is supposed to explain. It may look like an explanation because it restates the phenomenon in differ- ...