Hello puys,
Can someone plz share the Critical Reasoning material that I can use..
thanks
Q. A mail order company recently had a big jump in clothing sales after hiring a copywriter and a graphic artist to give its clothing catalog a magazinelike format designed to appeal to a more upscale clientele. The company is now planning to launch a housewares catalog using the same concept.
The companys plan assumes that
(A) other housewares catalogs with magazinelike formats do not already exist
(B) an upscale clientele would be interested in a housewares catalog
(C) the same copywriter and graphic artist could be employed for both the clothing and housewares catalogs
(D) a magazinelike format requires a copywriter and a graphic artist（B）
(E) customers to whom the old clothing catalog appealed would continue to make purchases from catalogs with the new format
OA - B. My ans - A.
A) Doesn't matter if they exist or not, since clothing catalog existed and newly hired graphic artist and copywriter;
B) magazine like format was done to appeal upscale clientele
C) the given situation; doesn't discuss this
D) same as above
E) again this is irrelevant to the situation given
Q. Because of a recent drought in Florida during the orange-growing season, the price of oranges this season will be three times the usual price. This will drive up the cost of producing orange juice and thus push up the price of orange juice for the consumer.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument above?
(A) The recent drought was not as severe as scientists predicted.
(B) States other than Florida also supply oranges to orange juice manufacturers.
(C) Other ingredients are used in the production of orange juice.
(D) Last year the price of oranges was actually lower than the average price over the past ten years.（B）
(E) The price of oranges will eventually be $0.48 per crate.
OA - B. My ans - C. The reasoning is that even though oranges can be supplied by other states still the passage mentions orange prices are going to be 3 times. so.. Please help!!
when states other than florida supply oranges, orange shortage would not be acute enough to drive prices up leading to orange juice becoming costly. so Answer B is correct.
Q. A light bulb company produces 2,000 light bulbs per week. The manager wants to ensure that standards of quality remain constant from week to week. The manager, therefore, claims that out of 2,000 light bulbs produced per week, 500 light bulbs are rejected.
Of the following, the best criticism of the managers plan is that the plan assumes that
(A) light bulb manufacturers cannot accept all light bulbs that produced
(B) the overall quality of the light bulbs would not be improved if the total number of light bulbs produced were reduced
(C) each light bulb that is reviewed is worthy of being reviewed
(D) it is difficult to judge the quality of a light bulb（E）
(E) the 1,500 light bulbs that are accepted will be of the same quality from week to week
Dint get this either!!
Clearly, the manager of claims that out of 2000 bulb produced weekly, because 500 bulb are rejected; quality of bulbs is maintained week over week. This is based on assumption of E
Q. Critics of sales seminars run by outside consultants point out that since 1987, revenues of vacuum cleaner companies whose employees attended consultant-led seminars were lower than revenues of vacuum cleaner companies whose employees did not attend such seminars. The critics charge that for vacuum cleaner companies, the sales seminars are ill conceived and a waste of money.
Which of the following, if true, is the most effective challenge to the critics of sales seminars?
(A) Those vacuum cleaner companies whose sales were highest prior to 1987 are the only companies that did not send employees to the seminars.
(B) Vacuum cleaner companies that have sent employees to sales seminars since 1987 experienced a greater drop in sales than they had prior to 1987.
(C) The cost of vacuum cleaner sales seminars run by outside consultants has risen dramatically since 1987.
(D) The poor design of vacuum cleaner sales seminars is not the only reason for their ineffectiveness.ďźˆA
(E) Since 1987, sales of vacuum cleaners have risen twenty percent.
Dint get this!!
Question is - Which of the following, if true, is the most effective challenge to the critics of sales seminars?
So out of given option if any of which weakens the critics' argument then it will be the most effective challenge to those critics.
Critics are saying that, companies whose employees attended seminars; their revenues dropped as compared to companies whose employees did not attend seminars. They have this data since 1987 to strengthen their point.
But no option is making sense to me how they are coming in context of argument presented.
What is OA and explanation?
Actually there is no explanation given... Hence me too am confused..
Guys,
I have started a thread
GMAT study centre in Kolkata
Please subscribe if you are based in/around Kolkata. 
For me the ans is A. What is OA?
Q) All German cars are safe, Dale drives a german car thus his car is safe.
Options:
1. Newest car always gets the better mileage.Helen has a new car, which must get better gas mileage.
2. A few of the candidates for the governor are Women. Dr. Lopez is a Woman.
3.No brands of natural peanut butter contain preservatives.The peanut butter i Dave's cabinet contain preservatives.
4.Every shark has a tail fin.The hammerhead is a kind of shark and thus has a tail fin.
5.Some days of the week are Saturdays and Sundays.Today is neither Saturday nor Sunday.
I selected the answer to be 1.
But was incorrect.
Can anyone please guide me on it.
Q) All German cars are safe, Dale drives a german car thus his car is safe.
Options:
1. Newest car always gets the better mileage.Helen has a new car, which must get better gas mileage.
2. A few of the candidates for the governor are Women. Dr. Lopez is a Woman.
3.No brands of natural peanut butter contain preservatives.The peanut butter i Dave's cabinet contain preservatives.
4.Every shark has a tail fin.The hammerhead is a kind of shark and thus has a tail fin.
5.Some days of the week are Saturdays and Sundays.Today is neither Saturday nor Sunday.
I selected the answer to be 1.
But was incorrect.
Can anyone please guide me on it.
Q) All German cars are safe, Dale drives a german car thus his car is safe.
Options:
1. Newest car always gets the better mileage.Helen has a new car, which must get better gas mileage.
2. A few of the candidates for the governor are Women. Dr. Lopez is a Woman.
3.No brands of natural peanut butter contain preservatives.The peanut butter i Dave's cabinet contain preservatives.
4.Every shark has a tail fin.The hammerhead is a kind of shark and thus has a tail fin.
5.Some days of the week are Saturdays and Sundays.Today is neither Saturday nor Sunday.
I selected the answer to be 1.
But was incorrect.
Can anyone please guide me on it.
Hey Asktarcar,
I'm putting my faith on choice 4 as the correct answer as it follows similar logic like the original statement does.
Probing more into your answer, here are my 2 cents.
Although, NEWEST cars give better mileage, Helen has a NEW car and we cannot confirm it to be NEWEST.
If you now look at option 4, every shark has a tail fin. It implies all sharks do and since a hammerhead is a kind of shark, it having a tail fin should be logically correct.
Or I may have messed up!
Q) All German cars are safe, Dale drives a german car thus his car is safe.
Options:
1. Newest car always gets the better mileage.Helen has a new car, which must get better gas mileage.
2. A few of the candidates for the governor are Women. Dr. Lopez is a Woman.
3.No brands of natural peanut butter contain preservatives.The peanut butter i Dave's cabinet contain preservatives.
4.Every shark has a tail fin.The hammerhead is a kind of shark and thus has a tail fin.
5.Some days of the week are Saturdays and Sundays.Today is neither Saturday nor Sunday.
I selected the answer to be 1.
But was incorrect.
Can anyone please guide me on it.
what is the question? it seems parallel reasoning, argument is "assertion1,assertion2, conclusion(assertion1 causes assertion2)"
Option 1 and Option 4 can be contenders, Option 4 wins, as option 1 has adjectives "must get", "always" etc. changes meaning a little.
It should be '4'.
Reason for '1' to be incorrect:- As mentioned already, "MUST GET", changes the meaning. Original Sentence:- Dale drives a german car thus his car is safe. --> DEFINATIVE.
Option 1 :- Helen has a new car, which must get better gas mileage. -->NON-DEFINATIVE.(Must get but might not get).
Hi,
For each of the five feature films premiering last July 4, the amount of money earned on opening day was considerably less than had been predicted by movie company executives. One of these movies, the movie starring Ty Fields, however, earned more on opening day than any previous Ty Fields movie had earned on its premiere.
If the above statements are true, which of the following can be properly concluded on the basis of them?
A . Movie executives were less accurate in their predictions of the amount the Ty Fields film would earn on opening day than with predictions for other movies opening that day.
B. Ty Fields' movie earned more on July 4 than did any of the other movies opening that day.
C. Ty Fields was the only actor whose movie earned more on opening day than any of his previous films had earned on their premieres.
D. The amount movie executives predicted that this Ty Fields movie would earn on opening day was higher than any previous Ty Fields movie had earned on its premiere.
E. The movie executives' prediction for the Ty Fields movie was higher than their predictions for other movies opening July 4
OA - D.
Dint get the logic or should say dont agree with the logic. Please can anyone explain.
TIA 😃
Help!
Clear-cutting a tropical rainforest exposes its shallow soil to heavy tropical rain. The soil is quickly washed away, causing floods and landslides, and preventing regeneration of the original rainforest. However, fast-growing softwoods, which can be harvested for a profit, will grow in clear-cut areas, halting further soil runoff. If we can't prevent clear-cutting, we should provide tax relief to companies that plant softwood plantations in clear-cut areas in order to minimize environmental degradation.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously calls into question the advisability of the above scheme?
A. Softwood plantations usually contain only one type of tree, and so lack the biodiversity of the original rainforest.
B. Increasing the value of clear-cut land will encourage the clear-cutting of more rain forest.
C .It would be cheaper to halt flooding and landslides by building dams and levees.
D .The original rainforests are clear-cut to obtain hardwoods, which are many times more valuable than softwoods.
E .Government incentives tend to have far reaching consequences that are difficult to predict and may turn out to be counterproductive.OA - B
Dint get the logic at all!!!
Hi,
For each of the five feature films premiering last July 4, the amount of money earned on opening day was considerably less than had been predicted by movie company executives. One of these movies, the movie starring Ty Fields, however, earned more on opening day than any previous Ty Fields movie had earned on its premiere.
If the above statements are true, which of the following can be properly concluded on the basis of them?
A . Movie executives were less accurate in their predictions of the amount the Ty Fields film would earn on opening day than with predictions for other movies opening that day.
B. Ty Fields' movie earned more on July 4 than did any of the other movies opening that day.
C. Ty Fields was the only actor whose movie earned more on opening day than any of his previous films had earned on their premieres.
D. The amount movie executives predicted that this Ty Fields movie would earn on opening day was higher than any previous Ty Fields movie had earned on its premiere.
E. The movie executives' prediction for the Ty Fields movie was higher than their predictions for other movies opening July 4
OA - D.
Dint get the logic or should say dont agree with the logic. Please can anyone explain.
TIA :)
Point 1 - Executives predicted each movie to earn some amount say A,B,C,D and E, but all of them earned less!
Point 2 - out of which say E is amount predicted for Ty Fields.
Point 3 - Ty Fields earned say Ex amount on its premier, which is higher than he earned on opening day of any of his other movies!
E > Ex (refer Point 1)
A - Executives are not speaking abt Ty Fields other movies, so out of scope
B - We don't know what amount other movies earned, so we can't be sure if Ty Fields movie earned more or less
C - Nothing is mentioned about other actors so we cant be sure here too
D - This is true.
E - Nothing is said about executives predictions about individual movies.
Help!
Clear-cutting a tropical rainforest exposes its shallow soil to heavy tropical rain. The soil is quickly washed away, causing floods and landslides, and preventing regeneration of the original rainforest. However, fast-growing softwoods, which can be harvested for a profit, will grow in clear-cut areas, halting further soil runoff. If we can't prevent clear-cutting, we should provide tax relief to companies that plant softwood plantations in clear-cut areas in order to minimize environmental degradation.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously calls into question the advisability of the above scheme?
A. Softwood plantations usually contain only one type of tree, and so lack the biodiversity of the original rainforest.
B. Increasing the value of clear-cut land will encourage the clear-cutting of more rain forest.
C .It would be cheaper to halt flooding and landslides by building dams and levees.
D .The original rainforests are clear-cut to obtain hardwoods, which are many times more valuable than softwoods.
E .Government incentives tend to have far reaching consequences that are difficult to predict and may turn out to be counterproductive.OA - B
Dint get the logic at all!!!
Adhiraj Poddar,
Here is why I think the answer is option B.
If tax relief was provided to each company that performed softwood plantation, it means they are making more money. This implies the option to make more money depends on clear-cutting the forest and then performing softwood plantation. Observing option B, if the clear-cut land is more valuable, then it is further fueling the cause of clear-cutting the amazon forest. The original idea was to minimize such clear-cut action but if option B were followed, it would defeat the purpose.
Looking at the other options, options C and D would not defeat the tax incentive idea while A and E have no foreseeable effect. Hope this helps.
Hello Everyone,
I am totally puzzled by the explaination and this CR qquestion in OG12.
here it goes ..
In Swartkans territory, archaeologists discovered charred bone fragments dating back one million years. Analysis of the fragments, which came from a variety of animals, showed that they had been heated to temperatures no higher than those produced in experimental campfires made from branches of white stinkwood, the most common tree around Swartkans. Which of the following, if true, would, together with the information above, provide the best basis for the claim that the charred bone fragments are evidence of the use of fire by early hominids?
(A) The white stinkwood tree is used for building material by the present-day inhabitants of Swartkans.
(B) Forest fires can heat wood to a range of temperatures that occur in campfires.
(C) The bone fragments were fitted together by the archaeologists to form the complete skeletons of several animals.
(D) Apart from the Swartkans discovery, there is reliable evidence that early hominids used fire as many as 500,000 years ago.
(E) The bone fragments were found in several distinct layers of limestone that contained primitive cutting tools known to have been used by early hominids.
Answer is E. Can't understand how. 
Hello Everyone,
I am totally puzzled by the explaination and this CR qquestion in OG12.
here it goes ..
In Swartkans territory, archaeologists discovered charred bone fragments dating back one million years. Analysis of the fragments, which came from a variety of animals, showed that they had been heated to temperatures no higher than those produced in experimental campfires made from branches of white stinkwood, the most common tree around Swartkans. Which of the following, if true, would, together with the information above, provide the best basis for the claim that the charred bone fragments are evidence of the use of fire by early hominids?
(A) The white stinkwood tree is used for building material by the present-day inhabitants of Swartkans.
(B) Forest fires can heat wood to a range of temperatures that occur in campfires.
(C) The bone fragments were fitted together by the archaeologists to form the complete skeletons of several animals.
(D) Apart from the Swartkans discovery, there is reliable evidence that early hominids used fire as many as 500,000 years ago.
(E) The bone fragments were found in several distinct layers of limestone that contained primitive cutting tools known to have been used by early hominids.
Answer is E. Can't understand how.
First, did you join pune study group topic?
Premise 1 - bone fragment of 1,000,000 age found
Premise 2 - they were burned in wood
Conclusion - hominids burned them for cooking (answer choice should confirm this conclusion)
A, B are out of question, D speaks of half of million years ago, not million years ago, so C and E remains. C doesn't help in concluding hominids burned these animals, so E is right answer.
Pune Study Group --> haven't joined yet
Thanks for your reply ..
Which of the following best completes the passage below:
In a study of the first 1000 Business school applications submitted to University X, it was found that one- fifth of the applicants claimed to have more years of work experience than they truly posses. However, the study underestimates the proportion of total applicants to University X who are dishonest ,because
1. The proportion of students who are dishonest about their work experience may be higher out of those who submitted their application after the first 1000 applicants than those applicants who were covered in the study.
2. the study may have considered an applicant dishonest when it was unable to easily verify work experience because a prior employer for which the applicant had truly worked had gone out of business.
3. some applicants who claimed to have possesed only a year or two of additional proffesional experience than they really had were also dishonest in the other parts of their application.
4. some applicants who claimed over a decade of work experience really possesed such work history.
5 .the proportion of applicants at University Y who were dishonest on their application was larger than University X.
Which of the following best completes the passage below:
In a study of the first 1000 Business school applications submitted to University X, it was found that one- fifth of the applicants claimed to have more years of work experience than they truly posses. However, the study underestimates the proportion of total applicants to University X who are dishonest ,because
1. The proportion of students who are dishonest about their work experience may be higher out of those who submitted their application after the first 1000 applicants than those applicants who were covered in the study.
Answer plz ... 😃