Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since collard greens have more nutritional value than lettuce, it follows that kale has more nutritional value than lettuce.Any of the following, if introduced into the argument as an additional premise, makes the argument above logically correct EXCEPT:a)Collard greens have more nutritional value than kaleb)Spinach has more nutritional value than lettucec)Spinach has more nutritional value than collard greensd)Spinach and collard greens have the same nutritional valuee)Kale and collard greens have the same nutritional valueCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

GMAT Exam > GMAT Questions > Kale has more nutritional value than spinach....

Join the Discussion on the App

Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since collard greens have more nutritional value than lettuce, it follows that kale has more nutritional value than lettuce.

Any of the following, if introduced into the argument as an additional premise, makes the argument above logically correct EXCEPT:

a)
Collard greens have more nutritional value than kale
b)
Spinach has more nutritional value than lettuce
c)
Spinach has more nutritional value than collard greens
d)
Spinach and collard greens have the same nutritional value
e)
Kale and collard greens have the same nutritional value

Correct answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

FREE This question is part of

Test: Additional Evidence

Attempt Test

Attempt this Test

Most Upvoted Answer

Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since collard greens...

To determine which premise, when introduced into the argument, would make it logically correct except for one, let's analyze each answer choice:

A. Collard greens have more nutritional value than kale.
If this premise were introduced, it would directly contradict the initial statement that "kale has more nutritional value than spinach." Therefore, this premise would not make the argument logically correct.

B. Spinach has more nutritional value than lettuce.
This premise does not affect the comparison between kale and lettuce. It provides additional information about the nutritional value of spinach and lettuce, but it doesn't change the relationship between kale and lettuce. Therefore, this premise could make the argument logically correct.

C. Spinach has more nutritional value than collard greens.
If this premise were introduced, it would not impact the initial statement that "kale has more nutritional value than spinach." Therefore, this premise could make the argument logically correct.

D. Spinach and collard greens have the same nutritional value.
If this premise were introduced, it would not impact the comparison between kale and lettuce. It provides information about the nutritional value of spinach and collard greens, but it doesn't change the relationship between kale and lettuce. Therefore, this premise could make the argument logically correct.

E. Kale and collard greens have the same nutritional value.
If this premise were introduced, it would directly contradict the initial statement that "kale has more nutritional value than spinach." Therefore, this premise would not make the argument logically correct.

After evaluating each answer choice, the premise that would make the argument logically correct except for one is option A. Introducing the premise that "collard greens have more nutritional value than kale" contradicts the initial statement about kale having more nutritional value than spinach. Therefore, option A is the correct answer.

Answered by Talent Skill Learning · View profile

Free Test

FREE

Test: Additional Evidence
10 Ques | 20 Min

Start Free Test

View all free GMAT tests

Community Answer

Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since collard greens...

Introduction:
The argument states that kale has more nutritional value than spinach, and collard greens have more nutritional value than lettuce. Based on this information, the argument concludes that kale has more nutritional value than lettuce.

Analysis:
To make this argument logically correct, we need to find an additional premise that supports the conclusion. Let's analyze each option to determine which one does not fulfill this requirement.

a) Collard greens have more nutritional value than kale:
If collard greens have more nutritional value than kale, this premise would not support the conclusion that kale has more nutritional value than lettuce. In fact, it would weaken the argument because collard greens would have the highest nutritional value among the four vegetables.

b) Spinach has more nutritional value than lettuce:
This premise is not necessary to make the argument logically correct since it does not directly relate to the comparison between kale and lettuce. The argument focuses on the comparison between kale and lettuce, not spinach and lettuce.

c) Spinach has more nutritional value than collard greens:
Similar to option (b), this premise does not directly address the comparison between kale and lettuce. It is irrelevant to the conclusion of the argument.

d) Spinach and collard greens have the same nutritional value:
This premise would not help make the argument logically correct either. It does not provide any information about the comparison between kale and lettuce.

e) Kale and collard greens have the same nutritional value:
This premise could potentially support the conclusion that kale has more nutritional value than lettuce. If kale and collard greens have the same nutritional value, and collard greens have more nutritional value than lettuce, then it can be inferred that kale also has more nutritional value than lettuce.

Conclusion:
Among the given options, the additional premise that does not make the argument logically correct is (a) - "Collard greens have more nutritional value than kale." This premise weakens the argument rather than supporting the conclusion.

Share via Whatsapp

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.

GMAT Focus Edition Mock Test Series 2024

Quantitative for GMAT

Crash Course for GMAT

Data Insights for GMAT

View all answers Start learning for free

< Previous Question Next Question >

Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Similar GMAT Doubts

Kobayashi coffee has more caffeine than Marlowe Select coffee. But since Chula Vista coffee has more caffeine than Valentino coffee, it follows that Kobayashi coffee has more caffeine than Valentino coffee.Any of the following, if introduced into the argument as an additional premise, makes the argument above logically correct EXCEPT?

View answer

Directions: Each of these critical reasoning practice questions are based on a short argument, a set of statements, or a plan of action. For each question, select the best answer of the choices given.Cheddar cheese is higher in saturated fats than Gouda cheese. Because Brie cheese is higher in saturated fat than Camembert cheese, we can conclude that Cheddar cheese has more saturated fat than Camembert cheese.Q. Any of the following statements, if introduced as an additional premise, makes the above argument logically correct EXCEPT

View answer

Logical arguments are usually classified as either deductive or inductive, depending on the process used to arrive at them. In the process of deduction, you begin with some statements, called premises, which are assumed to be true, and you then determine what else would have to be true if the premises are true. For example, in mathematics you can begin with some axioms and then determine what you can prove to be true given those axioms are true. With deduction you can provide absolute proof of your conclusions,since your premises are considered correct. The premises themselves, however, remain unproven and unprovable; they must be accepted on face value, or by faith, or for the purpose of exploration.On the other hand, in the process of induction, you begin with some data, and then determine what general conclusion(s) can logically be derived from that data. In other words, you determine what theory or theories could explain the data. For example, you note that the probability of becoming schizophrenic is greatly increased if at least one parent is schizophrenic, and from that you conclude that schizophrenia may be inherited. That is certainly a reasonable hypothesis given the data. Note, however, that induction does not prove that the theory is correct. There are often alternative theories that are also supported by the data. For example, the behavior of the schizophrenic parent may cause the child to be schizophrenic, not the genes. What is important in induction is that the theory does indeed offer a logical explanation of the data. To conclude that the parents have no effect on the schizophrenia of the children is not supportable given the data, and would not be a logical conclusion.Both deduction and induction by themselves are inadequate for a scientific approach. While deduction gives absolute proof, it never makes contact with the real world; there is no place for observation or experimentation - no way to test the validity of the premises. And, while induction is driven by observation, it never approaches actual proof of a theory. Accordingly, a synthesis of these two logical approaches is required for an actual scientific method.Which one of the following statements is true as per the information given in the passage?

View answer

Logical arguments are usually classified as either deductive or inductive, depending on the process used to arrive at them. In the process of deduction, you begin with some statements, called premises, which are assumed to be true, and you then determine what else would have to be true if the premises are true. For example, in mathematics you can begin with some axioms and then determine what you can prove to be true given those axioms are true. With deduction you can provide absolute proof of your conclusions,since your premises are considered correct. The premises themselves, however, remain unproven and unprovable; they must be accepted on face value, or by faith, or for the purpose of exploration.On the other hand, in the process of induction, you begin with some data, and then determine what general conclusion(s) can logically be derived from that data. In other words, you determine what theory or theories could explain the data. For example, you note that the probability of becoming schizophrenic is greatly increased if at least one parent is schizophrenic, and from that you conclude that schizophrenia may be inherited. That is certainly a reasonable hypothesis given the data. Note, however, that induction does not prove that the theory is correct. There are often alternative theories that are also supported by the data. For example, the behavior of the schizophrenic parent may cause the child to be schizophrenic, not the genes. What is important in induction is that the theory does indeed offer a logical explanation of the data. To conclude that the parents have no effect on the schizophrenia of the children is not supportable given the data, and would not be a logical conclusion.Both deduction and induction by themselves are inadequate for a scientific approach. While deduction gives absolute proof, it never makes contact with the real world; there is no place for observation or experimentation - no way to test the validity of the premises. And, while induction is driven by observation, it never approaches actual proof of a theory. Accordingly, a synthesis of these two logical approaches is required for an actual scientific method.The authors primarily concerned with

View answer

Recently, motorists have begun purchasing more and more fuel-efficient economy and hybrid cars that consume fewer gallons of gasoline per mile traveled.With that trend,there has been debate as to whether we can conclude that these purchases will actually lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists.The answer is no, since motorists with more fuel-efficient vehicles are likely to drive more total miles than they did before switching to a more fuel-efficient car, negating the gains from higher fuel-efficiency.Q. Which of the following best describes the roles of the portions in underline?

View answer

Top Courses for GMATView all

GMAT Focus Edition Mock Test Series 2024

Quantitative for GMAT

Crash Course for GMAT

Data Insights for GMAT

100 RCs for GMAT

Top Courses for GMAT

View all

Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since collard greens have more nutritional value than lettuce, it follows that kale has more nutritional value than lettuce.Any of the following, if introduced into the argument as an additional premise, makes the argument above logically correct EXCEPT:a)Collard greens have more nutritional value than kaleb)Spinach has more nutritional value than lettucec)Spinach has more nutritional value than collard greensd)Spinach and collard greens have the same nutritional valuee)Kale and collard greens have the same nutritional valueCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since collard greens have more nutritional value than lettuce, it follows that kale has more nutritional value than lettuce.Any of the following, if introduced into the argument as an additional premise, makes the argument above logically correct EXCEPT:a)Collard greens have more nutritional value than kaleb)Spinach has more nutritional value than lettucec)Spinach has more nutritional value than collard greensd)Spinach and collard greens have the same nutritional valuee)Kale and collard greens have the same nutritional valueCorrect answer is option 'A'. 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 Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since collard greens have more nutritional value than lettuce, it follows that kale has more nutritional value than lettuce.Any of the following, if introduced into the argument as an additional premise, makes the argument above logically correct EXCEPT:a)Collard greens have more nutritional value than kaleb)Spinach has more nutritional value than lettucec)Spinach has more nutritional value than collard greensd)Spinach and collard greens have the same nutritional valuee)Kale and collard greens have the same nutritional valueCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for GMAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since collard greens have more nutritional value than lettuce, it follows that kale has more nutritional value than lettuce.Any of the following, if introduced into the argument as an additional premise, makes the argument above logically correct EXCEPT:a)Collard greens have more nutritional value than kaleb)Spinach has more nutritional value than lettucec)Spinach has more nutritional value than collard greensd)Spinach and collard greens have the same nutritional valuee)Kale and collard greens have the same nutritional valueCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since collard greens have more nutritional value than lettuce, it follows that kale has more nutritional value than lettuce.Any of the following, if introduced into the argument as an additional premise, makes the argument above logically correct EXCEPT:a)Collard greens have more nutritional value than kaleb)Spinach has more nutritional value than lettucec)Spinach has more nutritional value than collard greensd)Spinach and collard greens have the same nutritional valuee)Kale and collard greens have the same nutritional valueCorrect answer is option 'A'. 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 Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since collard greens have more nutritional value than lettuce, it follows that kale has more nutritional value than lettuce.Any of the following, if introduced into the argument as an additional premise, makes the argument above logically correct EXCEPT:a)Collard greens have more nutritional value than kaleb)Spinach has more nutritional value than lettucec)Spinach has more nutritional value than collard greensd)Spinach and collard greens have the same nutritional valuee)Kale and collard greens have the same nutritional valueCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since collard greens have more nutritional value than lettuce, it follows that kale has more nutritional value than lettuce.Any of the following, if introduced into the argument as an additional premise, makes the argument above logically correct EXCEPT:a)Collard greens have more nutritional value than kaleb)Spinach has more nutritional value than lettucec)Spinach has more nutritional value than collard greensd)Spinach and collard greens have the same nutritional valuee)Kale and collard greens have the same nutritional valueCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since collard greens have more nutritional value than lettuce, it follows that kale has more nutritional value than lettuce.Any of the following, if introduced into the argument as an additional premise, makes the argument above logically correct EXCEPT:a)Collard greens have more nutritional value than kaleb)Spinach has more nutritional value than lettucec)Spinach has more nutritional value than collard greensd)Spinach and collard greens have the same nutritional valuee)Kale and collard greens have the same nutritional valueCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since collard greens have more nutritional value than lettuce, it follows that kale has more nutritional value than lettuce.Any of the following, if introduced into the argument as an additional premise, makes the argument above logically correct EXCEPT:a)Collard greens have more nutritional value than kaleb)Spinach has more nutritional value than lettucec)Spinach has more nutritional value than collard greensd)Spinach and collard greens have the same nutritional valuee)Kale and collard greens have the same nutritional valueCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Kale has more nutritional value than spinach. But since collard greens have more nutritional value than lettuce, it follows that kale has more nutritional value than lettuce.Any of the following, if introduced into the argument as an additional premise, makes the argument above logically correct EXCEPT:a)Collard greens have more nutritional value than kaleb)Spinach has more nutritional value than lettucec)Spinach has more nutritional value than collard greensd)Spinach and collard greens have the same nutritional valuee)Kale and collard greens have the same nutritional valueCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice GMAT tests.

Explore Courses for GMAT exam