reverse cause and effect ...............

not possible as assumption nice concept

27. Recent research has indicated that married people are not only happier than unmarried people, but also healthier.
This study has been widely reported by the media, with most commentators concluding that being married is good
for ones health and attitude. The conclusion of the media commentators depends on which of the following
assumptions?
The longer people are married, the happier and healthier they become.
Married couples who had a large, extravagant wedding are happier than those who had a small, simple ceremony.
Married people cannot get depressed.
Single people with depression or health problems are just as likely to get married as are other single people.
Some marriages are more harmonious than others

Research indicates that there is a connection between being married and being
happy and healthy. Media commentators have concluded that marriage causes
happiness and health. However, one could reasonably conclude from the
research that the cause and effect are the reverse: being happy and healthy
makes a person more likely to get married.
(A) The research compared married people to unmarried people. Neither the
researchers nor the media commentators made any distinction between
newlyweds and those who had been married a long time, so this assumption is
not necessary.
(B) The type of wedding is outside the scope of this argument. The research
compared married people to unmarried people, but made no distinction based
upon the type of wedding. Thus, this assumption is unnecessary.
(C) At first, this statement may seem necessaryafter all, if the commentators
conclude that marriage causes happiness, a lack of depression in married people
would certainly support that conclusion. However, the statement is too extreme.
One depressed married person does not invalidate the research indicating that,
on average, married people are healthier and happier than non-married people.
(D) CORRECT. This statement eliminates the alternative interpretation of the
research findingsthat being happy and healthy makes a person more likely to
get married.
(E) The research compared married people to unmarried people. Neither the
researchers nor the media commentators made any distinction between
harmonious marriages and combative marriages, so this assumption is not
necessary.

19. Medical education in the United States has focused almost exclusively on curative medicine, while preventive care
has been given scant attention. This is misguided. Medical schools should invest as much time in teaching their
students how to prevent illness as in teaching them how to cure it. Which of the following, if true, most strengthens
the argument above?
Many contagious diseases can be prevented with vaccines.
In 1988, for every three cents the United States spent on prevention, it spent 97 cents on curative treatment.
The number of students enrolled in medical school is the highest it has ever been.
More people die each year from disease than from accidental causes.
As the population grows, the number of doctors in certain specialties has not been keeping pace.

Hi mates,

uf! I don't see any clear answer...

I'd go with A

What's the conclusion? That medical schools should invest more in teaching to prevent diseases than to cure them. Well, A supports the argument
by explaining that some diseases can be prevented

OA and Source?

Sally makes a claim that picking one flower will not cause any harm. Joe replies
that her claim is not true and supports his response by citing the consequence of
everyone picking a flower. By doing so, Joe attempts to shift the focus away from
Sally's actual claim.
(A) Whether there are circumstances under which destroying the garden is
justified is irrelevant to Sallys claim that picking one flower is not harmful and
Joes argument refuting that claim.
(B) A circular argument assumes that which it is trying to prove. The following is
a circular argument: "Only an untrustworthy person would run for office. The fact
that politicians are untrustworthy is proof of this." Joes argument is not circular:
Joe does not rely on the assumption that Sallys statement is not true in order to
argue that Sallys statement is not true.
(C) While Joe does point out that the consequence of the collective action is
different from that of Sallys individual action, his argument is questionable
because in doing so he attempts to shift the focus away from Sallys actual claim,
not because he contradicts himself. There is no contradiction here.
(D) CORRECT. Joe attempts to refute Sallys claim by asserting that the
collective action of everyone would destroy the garden. This argument is
questionable because Sally merely made a claim about the consequence of
picking just one flower, not about the consequences of everyone doing so. By
using the consequences of everyone picking a flower to refute Sally's claim on
the consequences on picking just one flower, Joe implies that Sally's picking of
the one flower will necessarily lead to everone picking a flower (hence, leading to
the destruction of the garden). Not only is this assumption not necessarily true,
but it is also not supported by anything Joe says in his response: he merely
states a premise based on a hypothetical ("If everyone thought that way and
picked a flower...."). This questionable argumentive technique of shifting the
focus from the consequence of a single action to the consequence of a much
larger collective action without proving a cause-and-effect link between the single
and collective actions is known as the "fallacy of the slippery slope assumption."
(E) Joe says nothing that attacks Sallys character.

Re: Wide dissemination of wireless networks

Sat Mar 05, 2011 6:42 am

shantascherla wrote:Wide dissemination of wireless networks in cities is a practical way to meet the needs of city households, schools and businesses.
Rural communities have found that wireless networks are both more reliable and cheaper than land-based networks.

Which of the following would most likely be cited by a supporter of the argument?

Urban areas do not pose additional problems for the effective operation of wireless networks.
Wireless networks work far better where population density is low.
Iceland, a very rural country, successfully uses wireless networks.
The expenses of wireless transmission in areas with large buildings is much higher.
Poor neighborhoods have less access to cable internet than do educators or businesses

The answer is A.
In my analysis the most support for the argument "rural communities have found that wireless networks are both more reliable and cheaper than land-
based networks" comes from b rather than a

Can somebody please explain this

shanta,
The conclusion of this argument is: Wide dissemination of wireless networks in cities is a practical way to meet the needs of city households, schools
and businesses.
The premise of the argument is: Rural communities have found that wireless networks are both more reliable and cheaper than land-based networks.

Thus, we are concluding that wireless networks will meet the needs of cities because they have met the needs of rural communities. The assumption we
must make is that rural areas and cities are comparable in terms of our ability to implement these networks and make them work.

We are asked to choose an answer choice that strengthens the argument. A supporter of the argument will affirm this assumption. Answer choice A
does this nicely.

Answer choice B actually goes AGAINST the conclusion--it says that wireless networks work much better in areas where population is low. Thus, it
casts doubt on the idea that wireless networks will be a good solution for cities.
Jamie Nelson
ManhattanGMAT Instructor
23. According to a recent research study, more than 90% percent of graduates of private high schools in a certain
county continue their education in college. By contrast, only 65% of graduates of public high schools subsequently
pursue college education. Therefore, if parents in the county wish to increase the likelihood that their children will
attend college, they should send them to private rather than public schools. Which of the following statements
would most seriously weaken the argument above?
Graduates of private schools typically score higher on standardized tests and other tests of academic achievement.
While private schools are typically very expensive, attendance of public school is free for the residents of the
county.
In comparison with graduates of private schools, a substantially greater proportion of public school graduates
receive need-based financial aid for their college education.
In comparison with private schools, public schools provide more opportunities for student involvement in sports
and other athletic activities, which almost always increase the likelihood of students acceptance to colleges.
Since most public schools are located in rural areas of the county populated primarily by farmers, nearly 30% of
students from public high schools choose to pursue farming occupations rather than apply to colleges

23.
The argument concludes that children are more likely to attend college if they are
sent to private high schools instead of public high schools. The basis for this
claim is the higher percentage of graduates of private schools pursuing college
education. It is assumed that public schools are inferior to private schools as a
training ground for college. Any statement that provides an alternate explanation
for the fact that public school graduates attend college at lower rates than private
school graduates would weaken the argument.
Another way to interpret this question involves the concepts of correlation and
causation. The arguments premise states that private school attendance (vs.
public school attendance) is highly correlated with college attendance. The
conclusion of the argument is essentially that private school attendance CAUSES
college attendance (and therefore, parents ought to send their children to private
schools to ensure eventual college attendance). This conclusion depends on the
assumption that the causation does NOT work the other way in other words,
that readiness or desire to attend college does not influence the choice of public
or private school. Any evidence that readiness or desire to attend college DOES
influence the choice of public or private school will weaken the argument.
(A) While higher test scores might increase students' chances of admission to
college, they are unrelated to whether students will actually attend college. Even
if one could prove that earning higher test scores makes a student more likely to
attend college, this statement would not weaken the argument, but rather
strengthen it.
(B) Since the conclusion centers on the likelihood of attending college, economic
and financial considerations are outside the scope of the argument.
(C) Since the amount of need-based aid is not directly related to whether a
student will attend college, this statement is outside the scope of the argument.
(D) While better athletic opportunities could increase students chances of
admission to college, they are unrelated to whether students will actually attend
college. Also, even though the advantages of public school mentioned in this
statement were taken into account by the study, the proportion of graduates of
public schools attending colleges remains substantially lower than the proportion
of graduates of private schools.
(E) CORRECT. This answer choice demonstrates that the difference in the
percentage of graduates attending colleges stems not from any advantage
provided by private schools but from the fact that a subset of the graduates of
public high schools simply choose to pursue a different career path. In other
words, 30% of the graduates of public schools voluntarily choose not to pursue a
college education. Yet 65% - out of the 70% of graduates remaining - end up in
colleges. This statement indicates extremely high college matriculation rates for
students who want to attend college after graduation from public high schools.
Using the concepts of correlation and causation, this answer choice provides the
alternative causation for the correlation observed. In other words, "desire to
attend college" is ALREADY lower in the rural areas where public schools
happen to be located. According to this evidence, attendance at private or public
school is the effect, not the cause, of "desire to attend college."