Industries waste large amounts of valuable water. Government subsidies allow industries to pay little or nothing for water. Therefore, if industries are required by the government to pay full price for the water they use, inefficient use of water by industry would soon cease altogether.A flaw in the argumentandrsquo;s reasoning is that the argumenta)presents one possible solution to a problem as the only solution to that problemb)bases its conclusion on an ambiguous interpretation of the word andldquo;inefficientandrdquo;c)draws a conclusion that is stronger than what is warranted by the evidence presentedd)assumes what it sets out to provee)offers as evidence considerations that have no relevance to the argumentandrsquo;s conclusionCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

EduRev

All Courses

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

GMAT Exam > GMAT Questions > Industries waste large amounts of valuable wa...

Join the Discussion on the App

A flaw in the argument’s reasoning is that the argument

a)
presents one possible solution to a problem as the only solution to that problem
b)
bases its conclusion on an ambiguous interpretation of the word “inefficient”
c)
draws a conclusion that is stronger than what is warranted by the evidence presented
d)
assumes what it sets out to prove
e)
offers as evidence considerations that have no relevance to the argument’s conclusion

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

FREE This question is part of

Test: Logical Flaw

Attempt Test

Attempt this Test

Most Upvoted Answer

Industries waste large amounts of valuable water. Government subsidies...

(A) presents one possible solution to a problem as the only solution to that problem: This answer choice is not relevant to the flaw in the argument's reasoning. The argument doesn't claim that paying full price for water is the only solution to the problem; it simply suggests it as a solution.

(B) bases its conclusion on an ambiguous interpretation of the word "inefficient": The argument doesn't rely on an ambiguous interpretation of the word "inefficient." It assumes that industries are wasting valuable water, and the conclusion is that if they have to pay full price for it, inefficient use of water would stop. The interpretation of "inefficient" is not the issue here.

(C) draws a conclusion that is stronger than what is warranted by the evidence presented: This is the correct answer. The evidence presented is that industries waste valuable water and that they currently pay little or nothing for it due to government subsidies. The conclusion that inefficient use of water by industry would soon cease altogether if they had to pay full price is a stronger claim than what is supported by the evidence. The argument doesn't provide sufficient evidence to support the claim that requiring industries to pay full price would completely eliminate inefficient water use.

(D) assumes what it sets out to prove: The argument doesn't assume what it sets out to prove. It proposes a solution (paying full price for water) to address the problem of inefficient water use by industries.

(E) offers as evidence considerations that have no relevance to the argument's conclusion: The argument does not offer irrelevant considerations as evidence. It presents the fact that industries waste valuable water and pay little or nothing for it, which is relevant to the conclusion that requiring them to pay full price would eliminate inefficient water use.

In summary, the flaw in the argument's reasoning is that it draws a conclusion (complete cessation of inefficient water use) that is stronger than what is warranted by the evidence presented. Therefore, the correct answer is (C).

Answered by Talent Skill Learning · View profile

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

Directions: Read the Passage carefully and answer the question as follow.Prior to the fall of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), Mikhail Gorbachev, seeing a country falling behind its Western rival and a people increasingly clamoring for change, addressed the growing internal unrest in the summer of 1987 by introducing a series of reforms known as perestroika (literally, restructuring). In Perestroika: New Thinking for Our Country and the World, Mikhail Gorbachev discussed his analysis of the problems facing the USSR and his plans to solve them.Perhaps the most pressing and visible problem facing the USSR in the last 1980s came in the form of the country’s consistently mediocre economic performance, despite its vast natural resource wealth and large labor force. Gorbachev flatly admitted that economic failures were increasing and current policies were failing to offer a sustainable remedy. Failing to take advantage of the numerous scientific and technological advancements available, the USSR relied on inefficient and outdated business models. As a result, Gorbachev said, "in the last fifteen years the national income growth rates had declined by more than a half and by the beginning of the eighties had fallen to a level close to economic stagnation." With business executives focused on using more resources (in order to employ more peopl e) instead of becoming more efficient, the country produced poor quality products unable to compete in a global economy. Further, this inefficiency led to shortages: "the Soviet Union, the world’s biggest producer of steel, raw materials, fuel and energy, has shortfalls in them due to wasteful or inefficient use."The decrepit economy engendered social unrest and woe that only compounded economic difficulties and societal misery. Gorbachev wrote of "a gradual erosion of the ideological and moral values of our people" and noted the considerable growth in "alcoholism, drug addiction and crime." Accentuating these difficulties, the Communist government often ignored the needs of the average citizen, causing distrust and resentment. Perhaps the most destructive element of the social unraveling and inadequate government response was the mediocre education system. Gorbachev said, "Creative thinking was driven out from the social sciences, and superfluous and voluntarist assessments and judgments were declared indisputable truths."Although Gorbachev also opined about the growing public disbelief in the content of the immense government propaganda campaigns, the extent to which economic underdevelopment and social deviance gripped Soviet culture made the collapse of the USSR virtually inevitable in the minds of many observers. When combined with glasnost (literally, openness), Gorbachev’s plan that allowed greater transparency, perestroika actually served to hasten the collapse of the USSR. Contrary to its purpose, perestroika ensured that the fall of the USSR would occur sooner rather than later. Only a few years after Gorbachev implemented changes that would have been unthinkable and antithetical to the philosophy of previous leaders like Lenin, Stalin, and Khrushchev, the USSR fell.Q.Which of the following best describes the primary objective of the passage?

View answer

Directions: Read the Passage carefully and answer the question as follow.Prior to the fall of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), Mikhail Gorbachev, seeing a country falling behind its Western rival and a people increasingly clamoring for change, addressed the growing internal unrest in the summer of 1987 by introducing a series of reforms known as perestroika (literally, restructuring). In Perestroika: New Thinking for Our Country and the World, Mikhail Gorbachev discussed his analysis of the problems facing the USSR and his plans to solve them.Perhaps the most pressing and visible problem facing the USSR in the last 1980s came in the form of the country’s consistently mediocre economic performance, despite its vast natural resource wealth and large labor force. Gorbachev flatly admitted that economic failures were increasing and current policies were failing to offer a sustainable remedy. Failing to take advantage of the numerous scientific and technological advancements available, the USSR relied on inefficient and outdated business models. As a result, Gorbachev said, "in the last fifteen years the national income growth rates had declined by more than a half and by the beginning of the eighties had fallen to a level close to economic stagnation." With business executives focused on using more resources (in order to employ more peopl e) instead of becoming more efficient, the country produced poor quality products unable to compete in a global economy. Further, this inefficiency led to shortages: "the Soviet Union, the world’s biggest producer of steel, raw materials, fuel and energy, has shortfalls in them due to wasteful or inefficient use."The decrepit economy engendered social unrest and woe that only compounded economic difficulties and societal misery. Gorbachev wrote of "a gradual erosion of the ideological and moral values of our people" and noted the considerable growth in "alcoholism, drug addiction and crime." Accentuating these difficulties, the Communist government often ignored the needs of the average citizen, causing distrust and resentment. Perhaps the most destructive element of the social unraveling and inadequate government response was the mediocre education system. Gorbachev said, "Creative thinking was driven out from the social sciences, and superfluous and voluntarist assessments and judgments were declared indisputable truths."Although Gorbachev also opined about the growing public disbelief in the content of the immense government propaganda campaigns, the extent to which economic underdevelopment and social deviance gripped Soviet culture made the collapse of the USSR virtually inevitable in the minds of many observers. When combined with glasnost (literally, openness), Gorbachev’s plan that allowed greater transparency, perestroika actually served to hasten the collapse of the USSR. Contrary to its purpose, perestroika ensured that the fall of the USSR would occur sooner rather than later. Only a few years after Gorbachev implemented changes that would have been unthinkable and antithetical to the philosophy of previous leaders like Lenin, Stalin, and Khrushchev, the USSR fell.Q.The passage implies that which of the following was most true of the Soviet economy prior to perestroika

View answer

Editorial in Krenlandian Newspaper:Krenland’s steelmakers are losing domestic sales because of lower-priced imports, in many cases because foreign governments subsidize their steel industries in ways that are banned by international treaties. But whatever the cause, the cost is ultimately going to be jobs in Krenland’s steel industry. Therefore, it would protect not only steel companies but also industrial employment in Krenland if our government took measures to reduce cheap steel imports.Q.Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the editorial’s argument?

View answer

Editorial in Krenlandian Newspaper:Krenland’s steelmakers are losing domestic sales because of lower-priced imports, in many cases because foreign governments subsidize their steel industries in ways that are banned by international treaties. But whatever the cause, the cost is ultimately going to be jobs in Krenland’s steel industry. Therefore, it would protect not only steel companies but also industrial employment in Krenland if our government took measures to reduce cheap steel imports.Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the editorial’s argument?

View answer

The restaurant business wastes more energy than any other industry in the United States. Nearly 80 percent of the $10 billion spent on energy by the restaurant industry each year is squandered by the use of inefficient equipment. At the same time, approximately 70 percent of restaurants in the United States are small businesses that are usually too cash poor to invest in energy-efficient technology.Which of the following statements draws the most reliable conclusion from the information above

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

Industries waste large amounts of valuable water. Government subsidies allow industries to pay little or nothing for water. Therefore, if industries are required by the government to pay full price for the water they use, inefficient use of water by industry would soon cease altogether.A flaw in the argument’s reasoning is that the argumenta)presents one possible solution to a problem as the only solution to that problemb)bases its conclusion on an ambiguous interpretation of the word “inefficient”c)draws a conclusion that is stronger than what is warranted by the evidence presentedd)assumes what it sets out to provee)offers as evidence considerations that have no relevance to the argument’s conclusionCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
Industries waste large amounts of valuable water. Government subsidies allow industries to pay little or nothing for water. Therefore, if industries are required by the government to pay full price for the water they use, inefficient use of water by industry would soon cease altogether.A flaw in the argument’s reasoning is that the argumenta)presents one possible solution to a problem as the only solution to that problemb)bases its conclusion on an ambiguous interpretation of the word “inefficient”c)draws a conclusion that is stronger than what is warranted by the evidence presentedd)assumes what it sets out to provee)offers as evidence considerations that have no relevance to the argument’s conclusionCorrect answer is option 'C'. 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 Industries waste large amounts of valuable water. Government subsidies allow industries to pay little or nothing for water. Therefore, if industries are required by the government to pay full price for the water they use, inefficient use of water by industry would soon cease altogether.A flaw in the argument’s reasoning is that the argumenta)presents one possible solution to a problem as the only solution to that problemb)bases its conclusion on an ambiguous interpretation of the word “inefficient”c)draws a conclusion that is stronger than what is warranted by the evidence presentedd)assumes what it sets out to provee)offers as evidence considerations that have no relevance to the argument’s conclusionCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for GMAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Industries waste large amounts of valuable water. Government subsidies allow industries to pay little or nothing for water. Therefore, if industries are required by the government to pay full price for the water they use, inefficient use of water by industry would soon cease altogether.A flaw in the argument’s reasoning is that the argumenta)presents one possible solution to a problem as the only solution to that problemb)bases its conclusion on an ambiguous interpretation of the word “inefficient”c)draws a conclusion that is stronger than what is warranted by the evidence presentedd)assumes what it sets out to provee)offers as evidence considerations that have no relevance to the argument’s conclusionCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Industries waste large amounts of valuable water. Government subsidies allow industries to pay little or nothing for water. Therefore, if industries are required by the government to pay full price for the water they use, inefficient use of water by industry would soon cease altogether.A flaw in the argument’s reasoning is that the argumenta)presents one possible solution to a problem as the only solution to that problemb)bases its conclusion on an ambiguous interpretation of the word “inefficient”c)draws a conclusion that is stronger than what is warranted by the evidence presentedd)assumes what it sets out to provee)offers as evidence considerations that have no relevance to the argument’s conclusionCorrect answer is option 'C'. 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 Industries waste large amounts of valuable water. Government subsidies allow industries to pay little or nothing for water. Therefore, if industries are required by the government to pay full price for the water they use, inefficient use of water by industry would soon cease altogether.A flaw in the argument’s reasoning is that the argumenta)presents one possible solution to a problem as the only solution to that problemb)bases its conclusion on an ambiguous interpretation of the word “inefficient”c)draws a conclusion that is stronger than what is warranted by the evidence presentedd)assumes what it sets out to provee)offers as evidence considerations that have no relevance to the argument’s conclusionCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Industries waste large amounts of valuable water. Government subsidies allow industries to pay little or nothing for water. Therefore, if industries are required by the government to pay full price for the water they use, inefficient use of water by industry would soon cease altogether.A flaw in the argument’s reasoning is that the argumenta)presents one possible solution to a problem as the only solution to that problemb)bases its conclusion on an ambiguous interpretation of the word “inefficient”c)draws a conclusion that is stronger than what is warranted by the evidence presentedd)assumes what it sets out to provee)offers as evidence considerations that have no relevance to the argument’s conclusionCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Industries waste large amounts of valuable water. Government subsidies allow industries to pay little or nothing for water. Therefore, if industries are required by the government to pay full price for the water they use, inefficient use of water by industry would soon cease altogether.A flaw in the argument’s reasoning is that the argumenta)presents one possible solution to a problem as the only solution to that problemb)bases its conclusion on an ambiguous interpretation of the word “inefficient”c)draws a conclusion that is stronger than what is warranted by the evidence presentedd)assumes what it sets out to provee)offers as evidence considerations that have no relevance to the argument’s conclusionCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Industries waste large amounts of valuable water. Government subsidies allow industries to pay little or nothing for water. Therefore, if industries are required by the government to pay full price for the water they use, inefficient use of water by industry would soon cease altogether.A flaw in the argument’s reasoning is that the argumenta)presents one possible solution to a problem as the only solution to that problemb)bases its conclusion on an ambiguous interpretation of the word “inefficient”c)draws a conclusion that is stronger than what is warranted by the evidence presentedd)assumes what it sets out to provee)offers as evidence considerations that have no relevance to the argument’s conclusionCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Industries waste large amounts of valuable water. Government subsidies allow industries to pay little or nothing for water. Therefore, if industries are required by the government to pay full price for the water they use, inefficient use of water by industry would soon cease altogether.A flaw in the argument’s reasoning is that the argumenta)presents one possible solution to a problem as the only solution to that problemb)bases its conclusion on an ambiguous interpretation of the word “inefficient”c)draws a conclusion that is stronger than what is warranted by the evidence presentedd)assumes what it sets out to provee)offers as evidence considerations that have no relevance to the argument’s conclusionCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice GMAT tests.

Explore Courses for GMAT exam