No these statements do not counter each other. Read them like this:
2nd statement: No immunity => no right decision
1st statement: If immunity => May be correct decision
Principle: Two statements counter each other if the existence of one has a negative impact on the likelihood of the other.Both these statements are in harmony and they do not counter each other. One more thing, in CR, counter premise or anti-premise is always with respect to the conclusion and not any arbitrary statement in the passage
The above two statements would have countered each other if the 1st statement were changed to,
In some cases, people may make the right decision regardless of whether they have immunity.
In this case, the existence of the above would have a negative impact on No immunity => no correct decision.
The brains of identical twins are genetically identical. When only one of a pair of identical twins is a schizophrenic, certain areas of the affected twins brain are smaller than corresponding areas in the brain of the unaffected twin. No such differences are found when neither twin is schizophrenic. Therefore, this discovery provides definitive evidence that schizophrenia is caused by damage to the physical structure of the brain.
If the statements on which the conclusion above is based are all true, each of the following could be true EXCEPT:
(A) People who lack a genetic susceptibility for the disease will not develop schizophrenia.
(B) Medications can control most of the symptoms of schizophrenia in most patients but will never be able to cure it.
(C) The brains of schizophrenics share many of the characteristics found in those of people without the disorder.
(D) It will eventually be possible to determine whether or not someone will develop schizophrenia on the basis of genetic information alone
(E) Brain abnormalities associated with schizophrenia are the result of childhood viral infections that inhibit the development of brain cells
I will go with option B
The source of this question is
GMAT Test Prep - GMAT Practice Questions - Bolded Parts - May 26, 2011 - Bell Curves
You can see their official solution there. According to them, choice C is correct
I however do not agree with their official solution. Heres why:
What do bold face questions test:
Bold face questions test 3 things:
1. What is the first Bold Face statement? Is it a premise, prediction, principle, generalization etc.
2.What is the second Bold Face statement? Is it a premise, prediction, principle, generalization etc.
3.How are the bold face statements related to
a.the eventual and intermediate conclusions.
b.Each other.
Why, in my opinion, is Choice C incorrect?
The conclusion of this passage is: Town members cannot vote for right decisions if their votes are not anonymous. I would like to emphasize on the last part here. Another way to infer the conclusion is that the Town members may be able to vote for the right decisions provided they are allowed to cast anonymous votes.
Lets look at the second bold face: The second bold face states that anonymity in voting could give council members the autonomy to vote for legislation that negatively impacts community members essentially supporting the conclusion. Hence this is not a counter premise. This makes choice C incorrect.
Which is the correct choice?
Given the nature of the question, I would have to say that I am not sure which question is the correct choice. I would have said choice A had the entire last sentence been underlined; however, I would say that none of the choices fit for this question.
One correct choice could be, the first bold face defines a problem that the author aims to address while the second bold face is a potential solution to the problem
What is a counter-premise?
A counter-premise or an anti-premise is information presented in the argument that opposes the conclusion. Which means that if there is any information that is presented in the passage that makes the conclusion less likely, it is a counter premise. for example:
A recent experiment shows that higher proportion of kids catch flu in winter leading people to believe that cold weather causes flu. That is not true. The real reason more kids catch cold in winter is because they eat more cabbage in winter that contains the e-Coli. Another conducted experiment concluded that kids who do not eat cabbage during winter are as no more likely to catch cold in winter than in summer
Conclusion: The real reason more kids catch cold in winter is because they eat more cabbage.
The first B.F is a counter premise since it makes the conclusion less likely or opposes that conclusion.
Where can you get more information?
We offer the bold face portion free of charge on our website. I would recommend that anyone who wants to understand how to solve Bold face questions and practice 15-20 questions should register on our website.
Emin3m Saysoa : C ...
hi...since there has been a long discussion on this question all the major points have been covereed...but what i think is that the correct answer to this ques depends on the interpretation of two phrases mentioned in the stem...
1. legislation that negatively impacts community members
2. legislation that the community really needs
IMHO,
the first phrase should be interpreted as the legislation that will harm the community as a whole. It is not talking about the TAX RAISES..it talks about the other legislations that might harm community. Take irregularities in 2G spectrum allocation as an example.
The second phrase however says that some legislations might not be liked by everyone or by anyone...but need to be implemented for community benefit which community really needs.Take petrol price increase or tax raises as an example.
So going by this logic...the council members should not be able to pass legislations of first type. Providing anonymity would aid passing such legislations and thus would weigh against her conclusion.
Thus i think C is the correct answer
Maybe a little too much of interpretation...would like to know ur views...
Cheers,
GP
The brains of identical twins are genetically identical. When only one of a pair of identical twins is a schizophrenic, certain areas of the affected twins brain are smaller than corresponding areas in the brain of the unaffected twin. No such differences are found when neither twin is schizophrenic. Therefore, this discovery provides definitive evidence that schizophrenia is caused by damage to the physical structure of the brain.
If the statements on which the conclusion above is based are all true, each of the following could be true EXCEPT:
(A) People who lack a genetic susceptibility for the disease will not develop schizophrenia.
(B) Medications can control most of the symptoms of schizophrenia in most patients but will never be able to cure it.
(C) The brains of schizophrenics share many of the characteristics found in those of people without the disorder.
(D) It will eventually be possible to determine whether or not someone will develop schizophrenia on the basis of genetic information alone
(E) Brain abnormalities associated with schizophrenia are the result of childhood viral infections that inhibit the development of brain cells
Experts..Can some one explain why is the answer B and not E?
Nailing the answers in CR has always been an enervating task:shocked:...
I seek the help from CR Pros..Pen down few points that can add to the certainty of choosing the correct CR answers.....
Hi Guys,
Got a problem here...
Although computers can enhance peoples ability to communicate, computer games are a cause of underdeveloped communication skills in children. After-school hours spent playing computer games are hours not spent talking with people. Therefore, children who spend all their spare time playing these games have less experience in interpersonal communication than other children have.
The argument depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A) Passive activities such as watching television and listening to music do not hinder the development of communication skills in children.
(B) Most children have other opportunities, in addition to after-school hours, in which they can choose whether to play computer games or to interact with other people.
(C) Children who do not spend all of their after-school hours playing computer games spend at least some of that time talking with other people.
(D) Formal instruction contributes little or nothing to childrens acquisition of communication skills.
(E) The mental skills developed through playing computer games do not contribute significantly to childrens intellectual development.
Every year many people become ill because of airborne mold spores in their homes. After someone becomes ill, specialists are often hired to eradicate the mold. These specialists look in damp areas of the house, since mold is almost always found in places where there is substantial moisture. If one wishes to avoid mold poisoning, then, one should make sure to keep all internal plumbing in good condition to prevent leakage that could serve as a breeding ground for mold.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
1) Mold itself does not create moisture.
2) Most homeowners know enough about plumbing to determine whether theirs is in good condition.
3) Mold does not grow in dry areas.
4)No varieties of mold are harmless.
5)Mold spores cannot be filtered from the air.
Would like to go with (1)
If we consider this statement to be incorrect, that is, mold itself create moisture, the whole argument becomes baseless. No amount of plumbing and checking can help reduce the emergence of molds.
Although, (2) also seems to be quite a good option, i would sayits not a necessary assumption since the plumbing can be checked by a plumber or a neighbour, not neccessarily the homeowner.
Science Academy study: It has been demonstrated that with natural methods,
some well-managed farms are able to reduce the amounts of synthetic fertilizer
and pesticide and also of antibiotics they use without necessarily decreasing
yields; in some cases yields can be increased.
Critics: Not so. The farms the academy selected to study were the ones that
seemed most likely to be successful in using natural methods. What about the
farmers who have tried such methods and failed?
Which one of the following is the most adequate evaluation of the logical force of
the critics response?
(A) Success and failure in farming are rarely due only to luck, because farming is the management of chance occurrences.
(B) The critics show that the result of the study would have been different if twice
as many farms had been studied.
(C) The critics assume without justification that the failures were not due to soil
quality.
(D) The critics demonstrate that natural methods are not suitable for the majority
of framers.
(E) The issue is only to show that something is possible, so it is not relevant whether the instances studied were representative.
I would like to go with E, considering that I understood the wording of the question correctly.
I think what the question is trying to ask is to evaluate the reasoning given by the critics, and i was confused between A and E. B,C and D can be easily eliminated.
A also got eliminated because of the generic nature of the statement.
Better explanation of this problem is much needed !
Reptiles are air-breathing vertebrates with completely ossified skeletons; so alligators must be air-breathing vertebrates with completely ossified skeletons.
In terms of its logical features, the argument above most resembles which one of the following?
(A) Green plants take in carbon dioxide and release oxygen back into the air; so it follows that grass takes in carbon dioxide and releases oxygen into the air.
(B) Some red butterflies are poisonous to birds that prey on them; so this particular red butterfly is poisonous to birds that prey on it.
(C) Knowledge about the empirical world can be gained from books; so Virginia Woolfs book A Room of Ones Own must provide knowledge about the empirical world.
(D) Dierdre has seen every film directed by Rainer Werner Fassbinder; so Dierdre must have seen Ali: Fear Eats the Soul, a film directed by Fassbinder.
(E) Skiers run a high risk of bone fracture; so it is likely that Lindsey, who has been an avid skier for many years, has suffered a broken bone at some point.
Would go with A.
I had not encountered this kind of a problem till now, can you cite the source please, just to realise the relevence and importance of such questions.
Reasons: Only A seems to be following the exact same pattern. The info missing in the main sentence is :Alligators are Reptiles,
similarly, A is missing the following info: Grass is a Green Plant.
Hi Guys,
Got a problem here...
Although computers can enhance peoples ability to communicate, computer games are a cause of underdeveloped communication skills in children. After-school hours spent playing computer games are hours not spent talking with people. Therefore, children who spend all their spare time playing these games have less experience in interpersonal communication than other children have.
The argument depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A) Passive activities such as watching television and listening to music do not hinder the development of communication skills in children.
(B) Most children have other opportunities, in addition to after-school hours, in which they can choose whether to play computer games or to interact with other people.
(C) Children who do not spend all of their after-school hours playing computer games spend at least some of that time talking with other people.
(D) Formal instruction contributes little or nothing to childrens acquisition of communication skills.
(E) The mental skills developed through playing computer games do not contribute significantly to childrens intellectual development.
Would like to go with C.
Children will get more experience in interpersonal communication only when they talk to other people. So when the author says that all the spare time should not be spent on computer games, he is also assuming that if the students dont play games all the time, they are gaining some sort of experience by communicating with others.
GP,
A systematic approach works best when answering CR question. So I will quote you to make my point:
GP Said: So going by this logic...the council members should not be able to pass legislations of first type. Providing anonymity would aid passing such legislations and thus would weigh against her conclusion.
Are you saying that the author's conclusion of the entire passage is that council members should not be able to pass such regulations. If so then I would not agree with you. There is nothing in the passage that indicates the same.
The author's conclusion is that "If council members are not given anonymity, they will not be able to vote for legislation that is needed by the community but negatively impacts community members". You can see this conclusion starting from the word Though...
Since the second bold face is supporting the above conclusion, it cannot be the anti-premise.
I would recommend that you check out our free concept on Premise and Conclusion and Logical structure. We have a few complex passages that we discuss in these concepts.You can then review the Bold face concept which is also free and has 15-20 questions.
Please let me know if this helps.
The brains of identical twins are genetically identical. When only one of a pair of identical twins is a schizophrenic, certain areas of the affected twin's brain are smaller than corresponding areas in the brain of the unaffected twin. No such differences are found when neither twin is schizophrenic. Therefore, this discovery provides definitive evidence that schizophrenia is caused by damage to the physical structure of the brain.
If the statements on which the conclusion above is based are all true, each of the following could be true EXCEPT:
(A) People who lack a genetic susceptibility for the disease will not develop schizophrenia.
(B) Medications can control most of the symptoms of schizophrenia in most patients but will never be able to cure it.
(C) The brains of schizophrenics share many of the characteristics found in those of people without the disorder.
(D) It will eventually be possible to determine whether or not someone will develop schizophrenia on the basis of genetic information alone
(E) Brain abnormalities associated with schizophrenia are the result of childhood viral infections that inhibit the development of brain cells
The correct answer to this is Choice D. To answer this question, you have to first understand what the question is asking. This question is asking you to pick a choice that cannot be true or must be false. Its kind of a negative must be true question because the correct answer choice would be one that would be inconsistent with the information in the passage, which means if that particular answer choice is true then the information in the passage will be falsified.
Why is choice D correct?
Choice D states that there will be a time when it will be possible to determine solely on genetic information whether or not one will have schizophrenia
This is completely inconsistent with the information in the passage. Note that the passage states that the brains of identical twins are genetically identical, yet it states that one of them could have schizophrenia and the other not. Hence, if you examined their genes alone you could not have said who would have schizophrenia and who would not. Therefore, it is not possible to determine whether the person will have schizophrenia or not based on Genes alone.
Every year many people become ill because of airborne mold spores in their homes. After someone becomes ill, specialists are often hired to eradicate the mold. These specialists look in damp areas of the house, since mold is almost always found in places where there is substantial moisture. If one wishes to avoid mold poisoning, then, one should make sure to keep all internal plumbing in good condition to prevent leakage that could serve as a breeding ground for mold.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
1) Mold itself does not create moisture.
2) Most homeowners know enough about plumbing to determine whether theirs is in good condition.
3) Mold does not grow in dry areas.
4)No varieties of mold are harmless.
5)Mold spores cannot be filtered from the air.
My response is in bold.
Hi Cogni......congrats for the PuYScar award...! 
Would like to go with C.
Children will get more experience in interpersonal communication only when they talk to other people. So when the author says that all the spare time should not be spent on computer games, he is also assuming that if the students dont play games all the time, they are gaining some sort of experience by communicating with others.
Agree with C...author says that After-school hours spent playing computer games are hours not spent talking with people. So if they are not playing games,they must be talking to someone, author assumes.
The correct answer to this is Choice D. To answer this question, you have to first understand what the question is asking. This question is asking you to pick a choice that cannot be true or must be false. Its kind of a negative must be true question because the correct answer choice would be one that would be inconsistent with the information in the passage, which means if that particular answer choice is true then the information in the passage will be falsified.
Why is choice D correct?
Choice D states that there will be a time when it will be possible to determine solely on genetic information whether or not one will have schizophrenia
This is completely inconsistent with the information in the passage. Note that the passage states that the brains of identical twins are genetically identical, yet it states that one of them could have schizophrenia and the other not. Hence, if you examined their genes alone you could not have said who would have schizophrenia and who would not. Therefore, it is not possible to determine whether the person will have schizophrenia or not based on Genes alone.
Yes..D seems correct...but the conclusion of the passage says that that schizophrenia is caused by damage to the physical structure of the brain.
. So even if a person is not genetecially susceptible he might develop schizophrenia upon damage to brain. Thus Option A also seems right i.e NOT TRUE.
On the test day i would have marked A...
@Ganjupatel,
You have a good point. If you read the question again you will able to eliminate point A. The question above asks you to pick an answer that is impossible if the information in the passage is true.
The passage states that schizophrenia is caused by damage to the physical structure of the brain.. This statement does not mean that anyone(or everyone) regardless of their genes will develop schizophrenia provided physical damage is caused to their brain.
Let me give another example. Lets take a simple statement
An experiment found that 100 people who were bitten by female Anopheles mosquito developed malaria. Thus the experiment concluded that Malaria is caused when one is bitten by female Anopheles mosquito.
The above does not mean that everyone who is bitten by female Anopheles mosquito will end up with malaria. There may be a few people who have such strong anti-bodies that they won't be infected with Malaria even after they are bitten by female Anopheles mosquito.
In the same tone, the conclusion in bold does not mean that everyone who gets physical damage to the brain will develop schizophrenia. There may be (or may not be, note the argument does not rule this out) some people whose genetic structure is such that they will not develop schizophrenia.
Choice A talks about the possibility of existence of such a group and you could have a few people (notice how choice A uses "People who..." to designate a specific group of people) in the world for which the above may be true. Since choice A talks about only these people, choice A is a possibility given the information in the passage and hence it is not the correct choice.
Choice D however is a broad based choice (notice the word someone) referring to everyone. Based on the information in the passage, it is not possible to say that for any individual one will be able to conclusively say whether he/she is susceptible to schizophrenia solely based on genes. Hence, the existence of this choice is impossible given the information in the passage regarding the twins who have identical genetic buildup and this is the correct choice.
Bottom line: While evaluating the choices, understand their scope. Your thought process was correct, all you needed to do was to understand the answer choices and you would have picked the correct answer. When answering inference questions, you may be faced with this situation multiple times where you are left with two close choices and re-evaluating the answer choice will definitely help you pick the correct one.
I hope this is useful. If the explanation makes sense to you then do check out the scope explanation in premise-conclusion and logical-structure concept. These concepts are offered free of charge. We have some more examples to cover the same things (and approx. 50 questions to practice on)
Residents of an apartment complex are considering two possible plans for collecting recyclable trash. Plan 1-Residents will deposit recyclable trash in municipal dumpsters located in the parking lot. The trash will be collected on the first and the fifteenth days of each month. Plan 2-Residents will be given individual containers for recyclable trash. The containers will be placed at the curb twice a week for trash collection. Which of the following points raised at a meeting of the residents, if valid, would most favor one of the recycling plans over the other?
(A) Residents will be required to exercise care in separating recyclable trash from nonrecyclable trash.
(B) For trash recycling to be successful, residents must separate recyclable bottles and cans from recyclable paper products.
(C) Penalties will be levied against residents who fail to sort their trash correctly.
(D) Individual recycling containers will need to be made of a strong and durable material.
(E) Recyclable trash that is allowed to accumulate for two weeks will attract rodents
Should be E
If we know that collecting trash for 2 weeks will attract rodents, we should chuck plan-1 and take plan-2(speaking from the residents' perspective)
Police officers in Smith County who receive
Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) training
spend considerable time in weapons instruction
and practice. This time spent developing
expertise in the use of guns affects the instincts
of Smith County officers, making them too
reliant on firearms. In the past year in Smith
County, in 12 of the 14 cases in which police
officers shot suspects while attempting to make
an arrest, the officer involved had received
SWAT training, although only 5 percent of the
police force as a whole in the county had
received such training.
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens
the argument above?
a) In an adjacent county, all of the cases in
which police shot suspects involved officers
with SWAT training.
b) SWAT training stresses the need for
surprise, speed, and aggression when
approaching suspects.
c) Only 15 percent of Smith Countys SWAT
training course is devoted to firearms
lessons.
d) Among officers involved in the arrest of
suspects in Smith County in the past year,
the proportion who had received SWAT
training was similar to the proportion who
had received SWAT training in the police
force as a whole.
e) Some Smith County officers without SWAT
training have not been on a firing range in
years.
Like to go with D
A- Its irrelevant, talks about the other county
B- This is an opposite answer, it actually weakens the argument
C- Again an opposite answer
D- IMO is the correct answer, since the Officers who have been involved in arresting suspects in Smith County is a mix of SWAT trained and Non SWAT trained officers(as proven by this statement), the data clearly adds up to prove that officers receiving SWAT Training are more prone to use their firearms, and thus are more reliant on them.
E- Its not concerned to the arguments stated in the passage
When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf and are then asked whether they can hear the hypnotist, they reply, No. Some theorists try to explain this result by arguing that the selves of hypnotized subjects are dissociated into separate parts, and that the part that is deaf is dissociated from the part that replies.
Which of the following challenges indicates the most serious weakness in the attempted explanation described above?
(A) Why does the part that replies not answer, Yes?
(B) Why are the observed facts in need of any special explanation?
(C) Why do the subjects appear to accept the hypnotists suggestion that they are deaf?
(D) Why do hypnotized subjects all respond the same way in the situation described?
(E) Why are the separate parts of the self the same for all subjects?
Which of the following challenges indicates the most serious weakness in the attempted explanation described above?
(A) Why does the part that replies not answer, Yes?
(B) Why are the observed facts in need of any special explanation?
(C) Why do the subjects appear to accept the hypnotists suggestion that they are deaf?
(D) Why do hypnotized subjects all respond the same way in the situation described?
(E) Why are the separate parts of the self the same for all subjects?
When hypnotized subjects are told that they are deaf and are then asked whether they can hear the hypnotist, they reply, No. Some theorists try to explain this result by arguing that the selves of hypnotized subjects are dissociated into separate parts, and that the part that is deaf is dissociated from the part that replies.
Which of the following challenges indicates the most serious weakness in the attempted explanation described above?
(A) Why does the part that replies not answer, Yes?
(B) Why are the observed facts in need of any special explanation?
(C) Why do the subjects appear to accept the hypnotists suggestion that they are deaf?
(D) Why do hypnotized subjects all respond the same way in the situation described?
(E) Why are the separate parts of the self the same for all subjects?
my take : (D) Why do hypnotized subjects all respond the same way in the situation described?