Test: Method of Reasoning - GMAT MCQ

The psychologist's argument can be summarized as follows:

1. People tend to make cognitive errors when predicting future happiness.
2. However, people should not try to rid themselves of this tendency.
3. The psychologist uses the example of how parallel lines appear to converge in a visual context.
4. If a surgeon offered to fix this visual distortion, it would not be reasonable to accept the offer.

Now let's evaluate each answer choice:

(A) attempts to refute a claim that a particular event is inevitable by establishing the possibility of an alternative event. This answer choice is not supported by the psychologist's argument. The argument does not discuss the inevitability of a particular event or propose an alternative event.

(B) attempts to undermine a theory by calling into question an assumption on which the theory is based.
This answer choice is not applicable to the psychologist's argument. The psychologist is not challenging a specific theory or questioning its underlying assumption.

(C) argues that an action might not be appropriate by suggesting that a corresponding action in an analogous situation is not appropriate.
This answer choice accurately reflects the psychologist's argument. The psychologist suggests that just as it would be unreasonable to restructure one's eyes and visual cortex to eliminate the convergence of parallel lines, it is similarly unreasonable to try to rid oneself of the cognitive errors related to predicting future happiness. The psychologist draws an analogy between the two situations to argue against taking a particular action.

(D) argues that two situations are similar by establishing that the same action would be reasonable in each situation.
This answer choice does not align with the psychologist's argument. While the psychologist draws an analogy between the two situations, they argue that the same action would not be reasonable in each situation. Therefore, this choice is incorrect.

(E) attempts to establish a generalization and then uses that generalization to argue against a particular action.
This answer choice is not supported by the psychologist's argument. The psychologist does not establish a generalization and then use it to argue against a particular action.

Based on the analysis above, the correct answer is (C) argues that an action might not be appropriate by suggesting that a corresponding action in an analogous situation is not appropriate.

The passage argues against the notion that the economic problems of Western Europe in the 1980s were caused by the OPEC oil cartel. It points out that Great Britain, which was not dependent on OPEC oil, also suffered from the same economic problems as France and West Germany.

Now let's evaluate the answer choices:

(A) Offering Great Britain as a counterexample: The passage uses Great Britain as a counterexample to challenge the idea that OPEC was solely responsible for the economic problems. By stating that Great Britain, which was not dependent on OPEC oil, faced similar issues, the author undermines the claim that OPEC was the primary cause.

(B) Analyzing the economic difficulties of France and West Germany: The passage mentions the economic problems of France and West Germany but does not extensively analyze them. It focuses more on the counterexample of Great Britain rather than analyzing the specific difficulties.

(C) Pointing out a misconception in reasoning: This is partially true, but it does not capture the main point of the passage. The author does point out a misconception in reasoning by challenging the idea that OPEC was solely responsible for the economic problems. However, the main thrust of the argument is the counterexample of Great Britain.

(D) Proposing an alternative explanation: The passage does not propose an alternative explanation for the economic problems. It primarily focuses on challenging the idea that OPEC was the cause, rather than offering an alternative explanation.

(E) Drawing an analogy between France and West Germany: The passage mentions both France and West Germany as examples of countries facing economic problems, but it does not draw a direct analogy between them.

In summary, the correct answer is (A) because the author's point is primarily made by offering Great Britain as a counterexample to challenge the claim that OPEC was the cause of the economic problems in Western Europe in the 1980s.

This question presents a dialogue between Sarah and Paul regarding the effectiveness of a school policy that requires students to perform community service in order to foster a habit of volunteering. Paul disagrees with Sarah's argument against the policy and responds to her using argumentative techniques.

Let's analyze the answer choices to determine which one accurately describes Paul's response:

(A) He argues that Sarah is assuming just what she sets out to prove.
This choice suggests that Paul points out Sarah's circular reasoning or fallacy in assuming what she aims to prove. However, Paul's response does not directly address Sarah's assumption or circular reasoning.

(B) He argues that Sarah’s conception of what it means to volunteer excludes certain activities that ought to be considered instances of volunteering.
This choice suggests that Paul challenges Sarah's definition of volunteering, arguing that it excludes certain activities that should be considered volunteering. However, Paul's response does not address or challenge Sarah's definition of volunteering.

(C) He introduces considerations that call into question one of Sarah’s assumptions.
This choice suggests that Paul presents considerations or arguments that challenge one of Sarah's assumptions. This accurately describes Paul's response, as he counters Sarah's assumption that a person who has been forced to do something cannot be considered a volunteer. Paul provides examples of students who were initially forced to perform community service but subsequently volunteered willingly, thus challenging Sarah's assumption.

(D) He questions Sarah’s motives for advancing an argument against the school policy.
This choice suggests that Paul questions Sarah's motives for arguing against the school policy. However, Paul's response does not address or question Sarah's motives.

(E) He argues that a policy Sarah fails to consider could accomplish the same aim as the policy that Sarah considers.
This choice suggests that Paul argues for an alternative policy that Sarah fails to consider, which could achieve the same goal as the policy under discussion. However, Paul's response does not propose or argue for an alternative policy.

Based on the analysis above, the most accurate answer is (C) - Paul introduces considerations that call into question one of Sarah’s assumptions.

Let's go through each option and analyze Gregory's response to Sasha's argument:

(A) He ignores evidence introduced as support for Sasha’s recommendation.
Gregory does not ignore any evidence presented by Sasha. He acknowledges that handwriting analysis is currently problematic due to analysts exaggerating the reliability of their analyses.

(B) He defends a principle by restricting the class to which it is to be applied.
This option accurately describes Gregory's response. He suggests that the current problem with handwriting analysis can be resolved by establishing a licensing board to set professional standards. By doing so, he restricts the class of handwriting analysts to licensed practitioners, implying that they would adhere to the professional standards set by the board.

(C) He abstracts a general principle from specific evidence.
Gregory's response does not abstract a general principle from specific evidence. Instead, he proposes a specific solution (establishing a licensing board) to address the current problem with handwriting analysis.

(D) He identifies a self-contradictory statement in Sasha’s argument.
Gregory's response does not point out any self-contradictory statement in Sasha's argument. He agrees with Sasha's claim that the current use of handwriting analysis as evidence is problematic.

(E) He shows that Sasha’s argument itself manifests the undesirable characteristic that it condemns.
Gregory does not demonstrate that Sasha's argument exhibits the undesirable characteristic it condemns. Instead, he suggests a solution to address the problem identified by Sasha.

Therefore, the most accurate option is (B) He defends a principle by restricting the class to which it is to be applied.

The passage presents an argument regarding the allocation of federal funding to performing arts groups. In order to determine the structure of the argument, let's examine each answer choice:

(A) presenting a general statement, developing it with details, and suggesting an action to be taken:
This answer choice accurately describes the structure of the passage. The passage begins with a general statement about the importance of traditional regional performing arts groups and then provides details to support this claim. It concludes by suggesting that federal funding should be reconsidered to favor these traditional groups. This aligns with the structure of the passage, making (A) the correct answer.

(B) demanding attention for a cause, citing potential dangers for ignoring it, and insisting upon change:
This answer choice does not accurately describe the structure of the passage. While the passage does advocate for a change in the allocation of federal funding, it does not use a demanding or insistent tone. It also does not specifically mention potential dangers for ignoring the cause. Therefore, (B) is not the correct answer.

(C) undermining the opposition, calling previous activity into question, and drawing a conclusion:
The passage does not explicitly undermine any opposition, call previous activity into question, or draw a conclusion based on that. Instead, it focuses on presenting the argument for favoring traditional performing arts groups. Therefore, (C) is not the correct answer.

(D) beginning with a call to action, pointing out problems with those who oppose it, and concluding with a general remark:
This answer choice does not accurately describe the structure of the passage. The passage does not begin with a call to action or point out problems with those who oppose it. It primarily focuses on advocating for traditional performing arts groups. Therefore, (D) is not the correct answer.

(E) publicizing a concern, discussing possible alternatives to address it, and encouraging action:
While the passage does publicize a concern about federal funding favoring avant-garde groups over traditional ones, it does not discuss possible alternatives to address the concern. Instead, it directly suggests that federal funding should be reconsidered to favor traditional groups. Therefore, (E) is not the correct answer.

In conclusion, the correct answer is (A) presenting a general statement, developing it with details, and suggesting an action to be taken.

The question asks us to identify the chief flaw in Judge Hawthorne's argument, which is based on his record on age-discrimination cases and his decision in favor of elderly litigants. We need to consider the possibility that undermines his argument.

Let's evaluate each answer choice:

(A) in many of the judge’s cases, elderly litigants sued employers who sought to force them to retire.
This answer choice does not necessarily undermine the judge's argument. If the judge consistently ruled in favor of the elderly litigants in cases where employers were discriminating against them by trying to force retirement, it would support his commitment to protecting the interests of his constituents. Thus, this choice is not the chief flaw in the judge's argument.

(B) the judge himself is over 65 and is, therefore, a member of the group whom he judges.
While it may raise questions about potential bias, the judge's age and being a member of the group he judges do not directly undermine his argument. Age should not automatically disqualify a judge from presiding over age-discrimination cases. Therefore, this answer choice is not the chief flaw in the judge's argument.

(C) the evidence indicates that the elderly litigants should have won in more than 64 percent of the cases over which the judge presided.
This answer choice directly undermines the judge's argument. If the evidence suggests that the elderly litigants should have won in more than 64 percent of the cases, but the judge ruled in favor of them only 57 percent of the time, it shows that the judge has not consistently decided in favor of the elderly litigants as he claims. This discrepancy weakens his argument and suggests that his commitment to the interests of his constituents might not be as strong as he portrays. Therefore, (C) is a potential flaw in the judge's argument and could be the chief flaw.

(D) many of the cases involving the elderly had already been appealed in a lower court.
This answer choice does not necessarily undermine the judge's argument. Even if the cases had been appealed in a lower court, it does not automatically discredit the judge's decisions. It is possible that the judge's decisions were upheld, or they could have been modified based on the appeal. Therefore, this choice is not the chief flaw in the judge's argument.

(E) in cases that do not involve the elderly, the judge has decided in favor of the plaintiff more times than he has decided in favor of the defendant.
This answer choice is irrelevant to the judge's argument regarding age-discrimination cases. It introduces a different context by considering cases not involving the elderly. While the judge's record in other types of cases may be important for evaluating his overall performance, it does not directly impact the chief flaw in his argument about age-discrimination cases. Thus, this choice is not the chief flaw in the judge's argument.

After analyzing all the answer choices, we can conclude that the chief flaw in the judge's argument is that the evidence indicates that the elderly litigants should have won in more than 64 percent of the cases over which the judge presided. Therefore, the correct answer is (C).

Let's analyze the options:

(A) generating an explanation that apparently resolves discrepancies among several pieces of evidence: This option can be ruled out because there is no mention of discrepancies among several pieces of evidence in the passage. The author is simply observing a patterned marking on prehistoric pots made by two different cultures.

(B) reformulating an earlier theory that had been used to explain similar evidence: This option can be ruled out because there is no mention of an earlier theory being reformulated in the passage. The passage is focused on the observation of patterned markings on the pots and drawing conclusions based on that observation.

(C) using an analogy with an understood archaeological feature to draw a conclusion about a newly discovered feature: This option is the correct answer. The author uses the patterned markings observed on prehistoric pots made by the Woodland people (an understood archaeological feature) to draw a conclusion about a newly discovered feature, which is the patterned markings on the pots made by the Mill Creek people. The author argues that since the patterned markings on the Woodland pots result from the paddling method, and similar patterned markings are observed on the Mill Creek pots, it suggests that the Mill Creek people also used the paddling method.

(D) theorizing about how pottery from one culture might have been influenced by interaction with another culture: This option can be ruled out because there is no mention of interaction between cultures or how one culture might have influenced another in the passage. The focus is solely on the observed patterned markings and the method used to create them.

(E) identifying the effects that different societal circumstances had on pottery-making: This option can be ruled out because there is no discussion of different societal circumstances and their effects on pottery-making in the passage. The passage is centered around the observation of patterned markings and the method used to create them.

Therefore, the correct answer is (C) using an analogy with an understood archaeological feature to draw a conclusion about a newly discovered feature.

The economist's argument is that the automobile industry is on the way to recovery from an earlier slump. The evidence provided is that auto companies are purchasing more equipment and spending more on research and development (R&D) than ever before. This evidence suggests that the companies expect sales to increase in the near future.

Now let's analyze the answer choices:

(A) It is an inference drawn from the premise that the auto companies expect sales to increase in the near future.
This answer choice incorrectly identifies the relationship between the evidence and the premise. The evidence itself is not an inference drawn from the premise; it is the other way around. The evidence supports the premise, not the other way around.

(B) It is an inference drawn from the premise that the automotive industry is recovering.
This answer choice incorrectly identifies the relationship between the evidence and the premise. While the evidence does support the premise that the industry is recovering, the evidence itself does not directly infer the recovery of the industry. The evidence is more specific to the actions of auto companies.

(C) It is the primary evidence from which the argument's conclusion is drawn.
This answer choice correctly identifies the role of the evidence. The economist's argument is based on the fact that auto companies are purchasing more equipment and spending more on R&D. This evidence is the primary support for the conclusion that the industry is on the way to recovery.

(D) Its truth is required in order for the argument's conclusion to be true.
This answer choice incorrectly identifies the role of the evidence. While the truth of the evidence supports the argument's conclusion, it is not explicitly stated that the truth of the evidence is required for the conclusion to be true.

(E) It is the phenomenon that the argument seeks to explain.
This answer choice incorrectly identifies the role of the evidence. The evidence does not seek to explain any particular phenomenon; it is used to support the conclusion that the automobile industry is on the way to recovery.

Based on the analysis, the correct answer is (C) "It is the primary evidence from which the argument's conclusion is drawn."

Let's break down each answer choice and see which one accurately describes the argument's structure:

(A) describing how a testing situation approximates the real-life conditions of ordinary use: This answer choice is not applicable to the argument. The argument does not discuss how the testing situation relates to real-life conditions.

(B) using the claims of a subset of a group to make a recommendation to the larger group: This answer choice accurately describes the structure of the argument. The argument relies on the observations and findings of a subset of serious amateur photographers who tested the Apheron camera to recommend it to all serious photographers.

(C) evaluating the credibility of a recommendation made by a particular group: This answer choice is not applicable to the argument. The argument does not focus on evaluating the credibility of a particular group's recommendation.

(D) distinguishing between the actual reasons why a certain group did a particular thing and the best reasons for doing that thing: This answer choice is not applicable to the argument. The argument does not discuss the reasons behind the actions of a certain group.

(E) placing an experience in a wider context in order to explain it: This answer choice is not applicable to the argument. The argument does not place the experience in a wider context.

Therefore, the correct answer is (B) using the claims of a subset of a group to make a recommendation to the larger group.

Let's break down the options:

(A) Referring to a scholarly authority to challenge a widely held belief: The educator does not explicitly refer to a scholarly authority to challenge a widely held belief. The argument focuses on the features and benefits of Plymouth Online's programs.

(B) Questioning the accuracy of evidence given in support of an opposing position: The educator does not question the accuracy of evidence provided by opponents of online universities. The argument presents a positive case for Plymouth Online's offerings.

(C) Offering a counterexample to a prevalent belief among experts in the field: This is the correct answer. The educator is presenting Plymouth Online as a counterexample to the prevalent belief that online courses lack collaboration and support compared to traditional classrooms. By highlighting the interactive features and the potential for a rich and satisfying experience, the argument challenges the prevailing belief.

(D) Proposing an alternative sociological explanation for a pedagogical practice: The educator does not propose an alternative sociological explanation for a pedagogical practice. The argument focuses on the features of online education.

(E) Making a distinction between instructional approaches: The educator does make a distinction between instructional approaches, highlighting the features of Plymouth Online's programs. However, the main focus is on countering the prevalent belief rather than merely highlighting the distinction.

Therefore, the correct answer is (C) offering a counterexample to a prevalent belief among experts in the field.