All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
GMAT Exam  >  GMAT Questions  >  During the Second World War, about 375,000 ci... Start Learning for Free
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App
During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the United States and about 408,000 members of the United States armed forces died overseas. On the basis the those figures, it can be concluded that it was not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay at home as a civilian.
Which of the following would reveal most clearly the absurdity of the conclusion drawn above?
  • a)
    Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United State in addition to deaths among members of the armed forces serving overseas
  • b)
    Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed forces as a percentage of the total number of deaths
  • c)
    Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat injuries
  • d)
    Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deaths
  • e)
    Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed forces
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
FREE This question is part of
Download PDF Attempt Test
Download PDF Attempt this Test
Verified Answer
During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite...
Concluding from the similar numbers of deaths in two groups that the relative danger of death was similar for both groups is absurd if, as here, one group was far smaller. D exposes this absurdity by pointing out the need to compare death rates of the two groups, which would reveal the higher death rate for the smaller group. Therefore, D is the best answer. Since the conclusion acknowledges the difference between the number of civilian and armed forces deaths, expressing this difference as a percentage, as suggested by B, is beside the point. A is inappropriate because it simply adds a third group to the two being compared. Because cause of death in not at issue, C and E are irrelevant.
View all questions of this test
Most Upvoted Answer
During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the Unite...
Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group:
- By comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deaths, we can get a more accurate picture of the relative danger of being in the armed forces overseas versus staying at home as a civilian.
- This approach takes into account the size of each group, providing a more meaningful comparison.
- It allows us to see the risk of death in each group more clearly, as it standardizes the data based on the population size.
- This method would reveal that, despite the total number of deaths being similar, the death rate per thousand members of the armed forces overseas is likely much higher than that of civilians in the United States.
- Therefore, this comparison method exposes the flaw in the initial conclusion that being overseas in the armed forces during World War II was not much more dangerous than staying at home as a civilian.
Attention GMAT Students!
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed GMAT study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in GMAT.
< Previous Question Next Question >
Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Similar GMAT Doubts

Directions: Read the Passage carefully and answer the question as follow.The word Inference is used in two different senses, which are often confused but should be carefully distinguished. In the first sense, it means a process of thought or reasoning by which the mind passes from facts or statements presented, to some opinion or expectation. The data may be very vague and slight, prompting no more than a guess or surmise; as from the trick of a man’s face entertain some prejudice as to his character. Or the data may be important and strongly significant, like the footprint that frightened Crusoe into thinking of cannibals, or as when news of war makes the city expect that Consols will fall. These are examples of the act of inferring, or of inference as a process; and with inference in this sense Logic has nothing to do; it belongs to Psychology to explain how it is that our minds pass from one perception or thought to another thought, and how we come to conjecture, conclude and believe. In the second sense, ‘inference’ means not this process of guessing or opining, but the result of it; the surmise, opinion, or belief when formed; in a word, the conclusion: and it is in this sense that Inference is treated off in Logic. The subject-matter of Logic is an inference, judgment or conclusion concerning facts, embodied in a proposition, which is to be examined in relation to the evidence that may be adduced for it, in order to determine whether, or how far, the evidence amounts to proof.Logic is the science of Reasoning in the sense in which ‘reasoning’ means giving reasons, for it shows what sort of reasons are good. Whilst Psychology explains how the mind goes forward from data to conclusions, Logic takes a conclusion and goes back to the data, inquiring whether those data, together with any other evidence (facts or principles) that can be collected, are of a nature to warrant the conclusion. If we think that John Doe is of an amiable disposition, that water expands on freezing, or that one means to national prosperity is popular education, and wish to know whether we have evidence sufficient to justify us in holding these opinions, Logic can tell us what form the evidence should assume in order to be conclusive. But whatever facts constitute the evidence, they must, in order to prove the point, admit of being stated in conformity with certain principles or conditions; and of these principles or conditions Logic is the science. It deals, then, not with the subjective process of inferring, but with the objective grounds that justify or discredit the inference.Q. The passage states which of the following about Logic?

Directions: Read the Passage carefully and answer the question as follow.The word Inference is used in two different senses, which are often confused but should be carefully distinguished. In the first sense, it means a process of thought or reasoning by which the mind passes from facts or statements presented, to some opinion or expectation. The data may be very vague and slight, prompting no more than a guess or surmise; as from the trick of a man’s face entertain some prejudice as to his character. Or the data may be important and strongly significant, like the footprint that frightened Crusoe into thinking of cannibals, or as when news of war makes the city expect that Consols will fall. These are examples of the act of inferring, or of inference as a process; and with inference in this sense Logic has nothing to do; it belongs to Psychology to explain how it is that our minds pass from one perception or thought to another thought, and how we come to conjecture, conclude and believe. In the second sense, ‘inference’ means not this process of guessing or opining, but the result of it; the surmise, opinion, or belief when formed; in a word, the conclusion: and it is in this sense that Inference is treated off in Logic. The subject-matter of Logic is an inference, judgment or conclusion concerning facts, embodied in a proposition, which is to be examined in relation to the evidence that may be adduced for it, in order to determine whether, or how far, the evidence amounts to proof.Logic is the science of Reasoning in the sense in which ‘reasoning’ means giving reasons, for it shows what sort of reasons are good. Whilst Psychology explains how the mind goes forward from data to conclusions, Logic takes a conclusion and goes back to the data, inquiring whether those data, together with any other evidence (facts or principles) that can be collected, are of a nature to warrant the conclusion. If we think that John Doe is of an amiable disposition, that water expands on freezing, or that one means to national prosperity is popular education, and wish to know whether we have evidence sufficient to justify us in holding these opinions, Logic can tell us what form the evidence should assume in order to be conclusive. But whatever facts constitute the evidence, they must, in order to prove the point, admit of being stated in conformity with certain principles or conditions; and of these principles or conditions Logic is the science. It deals, then, not with the subjective process of inferring, but with the objective grounds that justify or discredit the inference.Q. As described in the passage, each of the following could be an example of Inference in terms of its first connotation, EXCEPT

Directions: Read the Passage carefully and answer the question as follow.The word Inference is used in two different senses, which are often confused but should be carefully distinguished. In the first sense, it means a process of thought or reasoning by which the mind passes from facts or statements presented, to some opinion or expectation. The data may be very vague and slight, prompting no more than a guess or surmise; as from the trick of a man’s face entertain some prejudice as to his character. Or the data may be important and strongly significant, like the footprint that frightened Crusoe into thinking of cannibals, or as when news of war makes the city expect that Consols will fall. These are examples of the act of inferring, or of inference as a process; and with inference in this sense Logic has nothing to do; it belongs to Psychology to explain how it is that our minds pass from one perception or thought to another thought, and how we come to conjecture, conclude and believe. In the second sense, ‘inference’ means not this process of guessing or opining, but the result of it; the surmise, opinion, or belief when formed; in a word, the conclusion: and it is in this sense that Inference is treated off in Logic. The subject-matter of Logic is an inference, judgment or conclusion concerning facts, embodied in a proposition, which is to be examined in relation to the evidence that may be adduced for it, in order to determine whether, or how far, the evidence amounts to proof.Logic is the science of Reasoning in the sense in which ‘reasoning’ means giving reasons, for it shows what sort of reasons are good. Whilst Psychology explains how the mind goes forward from data to conclusions, Logic takes a conclusion and goes back to the data, inquiring whether those data, together with any other evidence (facts or principles) that can be collected, are of a nature to warrant the conclusion. If we think that John Doe is of an amiable disposition, that water expands on freezing, or that one means to national prosperity is popular education, and wish to know whether we have evidence sufficient to justify us in holding these opinions, Logic can tell us what form the evidence should assume in order to be conclusive. But whatever facts constitute the evidence, they must, in order to prove the point, admit of being stated in conformity with certain principles or conditions; and of these principles or conditions Logic is the science. It deals, then, not with the subjective process of inferring, but with the objective grounds that justify or discredit the inference.Q. Which of the following best describes the relationship between Psychology and Logic?

Directions: Read the Passage carefully and answer the question as follow.The word Inference is used in two different senses, which are often confused but should be carefully distinguished. In the first sense, it means a process of thought or reasoning by which the mind passes from facts or statements presented, to some opinion or expectation. The data may be very vague and slight, prompting no more than a guess or surmise; as from the trick of a man’s face entertain some prejudice as to his character. Or the data may be important and strongly significant, like the footprint that frightened Crusoe into thinking of cannibals, or as when news of war makes the city expect that Consols will fall. These are examples of the act of inferring, or of inference as a process; and with inference in this sense Logic has nothing to do; it belongs to Psychology to explain how it is that our minds pass from one perception or thought to another thought, and how we come to conjecture, conclude and believe. In the second sense, ‘inference’ means not this process of guessing or opining, but the result of it; the surmise, opinion, or belief when formed; in a word, the conclusion: and it is in this sense that Inference is treated off in Logic. The subject-matter of Logic is an inference, judgment or conclusion concerning facts, embodied in a proposition, which is to be examined in relation to the evidence that may be adduced for it, in order to determine whether, or how far, the evidence amounts to proof.Logic is the science of Reasoning in the sense in which ‘reasoning’ means giving reasons, for it shows what sort of reasons are good. Whilst Psychology explains how the mind goes forward from data to conclusions, Logic takes a conclusion and goes back to the data, inquiring whether those data, together with any other evidence (facts or principles) that can be collected, are of a nature to warrant the conclusion. If we think that John Doe is of an amiable disposition, that water expands on freezing, or that one means to national prosperity is popular education, and wish to know whether we have evidence sufficient to justify us in holding these opinions, Logic can tell us what form the evidence should assume in order to be conclusive. But whatever facts constitute the evidence, they must, in order to prove the point, admit of being stated in conformity with certain principles or conditions; and of these principles or conditions Logic is the science. It deals, then, not with the subjective process of inferring, but with the objective grounds that justify or discredit the inference.Q.What is the primary purpose of the passage?

Top Courses for GMATView all

Top Courses for GMAT

During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the United States and about 408,000 members of the United States armed forces died overseas. On the basis the those figures, it can be concluded that it was not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay at home as a civilian.Which of the following would reveal most clearly the absurdity of the conclusion drawn above?a)Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United State in addition to deaths among members of the armed forces serving overseasb)Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed forces as a percentage of the total number of deathsc)Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat injuriesd)Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deathse)Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed forcesCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the United States and about 408,000 members of the United States armed forces died overseas. On the basis the those figures, it can be concluded that it was not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay at home as a civilian.Which of the following would reveal most clearly the absurdity of the conclusion drawn above?a)Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United State in addition to deaths among members of the armed forces serving overseasb)Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed forces as a percentage of the total number of deathsc)Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat injuriesd)Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deathse)Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed forcesCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for GMAT 2024 is part of GMAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the GMAT exam syllabus. Information about During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the United States and about 408,000 members of the United States armed forces died overseas. On the basis the those figures, it can be concluded that it was not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay at home as a civilian.Which of the following would reveal most clearly the absurdity of the conclusion drawn above?a)Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United State in addition to deaths among members of the armed forces serving overseasb)Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed forces as a percentage of the total number of deathsc)Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat injuriesd)Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deathse)Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed forcesCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for GMAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the United States and about 408,000 members of the United States armed forces died overseas. On the basis the those figures, it can be concluded that it was not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay at home as a civilian.Which of the following would reveal most clearly the absurdity of the conclusion drawn above?a)Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United State in addition to deaths among members of the armed forces serving overseasb)Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed forces as a percentage of the total number of deathsc)Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat injuriesd)Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deathse)Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed forcesCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the United States and about 408,000 members of the United States armed forces died overseas. On the basis the those figures, it can be concluded that it was not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay at home as a civilian.Which of the following would reveal most clearly the absurdity of the conclusion drawn above?a)Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United State in addition to deaths among members of the armed forces serving overseasb)Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed forces as a percentage of the total number of deathsc)Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat injuriesd)Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deathse)Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed forcesCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for GMAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for GMAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the United States and about 408,000 members of the United States armed forces died overseas. On the basis the those figures, it can be concluded that it was not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay at home as a civilian.Which of the following would reveal most clearly the absurdity of the conclusion drawn above?a)Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United State in addition to deaths among members of the armed forces serving overseasb)Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed forces as a percentage of the total number of deathsc)Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat injuriesd)Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deathse)Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed forcesCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the United States and about 408,000 members of the United States armed forces died overseas. On the basis the those figures, it can be concluded that it was not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay at home as a civilian.Which of the following would reveal most clearly the absurdity of the conclusion drawn above?a)Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United State in addition to deaths among members of the armed forces serving overseasb)Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed forces as a percentage of the total number of deathsc)Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat injuriesd)Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deathse)Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed forcesCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the United States and about 408,000 members of the United States armed forces died overseas. On the basis the those figures, it can be concluded that it was not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay at home as a civilian.Which of the following would reveal most clearly the absurdity of the conclusion drawn above?a)Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United State in addition to deaths among members of the armed forces serving overseasb)Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed forces as a percentage of the total number of deathsc)Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat injuriesd)Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deathse)Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed forcesCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the United States and about 408,000 members of the United States armed forces died overseas. On the basis the those figures, it can be concluded that it was not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay at home as a civilian.Which of the following would reveal most clearly the absurdity of the conclusion drawn above?a)Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United State in addition to deaths among members of the armed forces serving overseasb)Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed forces as a percentage of the total number of deathsc)Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat injuriesd)Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deathse)Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed forcesCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice During the Second World War, about 375,000 civilians died in the United States and about 408,000 members of the United States armed forces died overseas. On the basis the those figures, it can be concluded that it was not much more dangerous to be overseas in the armed forces during the Second World War than it was to stay at home as a civilian.Which of the following would reveal most clearly the absurdity of the conclusion drawn above?a)Counting deaths among members of the armed forces who served in the United State in addition to deaths among members of the armed forces serving overseasb)Expressing the difference between the numbers of deaths among civilians and members of the armed forces as a percentage of the total number of deathsc)Separating deaths caused by accidents during service in the armed forces from deaths caused by combat injuriesd)Comparing death rates per thousand members of each group rather than comparing total numbers of deathse)Comparing deaths caused by accidents in the United States to deaths caused by combat in the armed forcesCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice GMAT tests.
Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Top Courses for GMAT

Explore Courses

Suggested Free Tests

Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev
Get App
© EduRev
Education Revolution
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup