Editorialist: Drivers with a large number of demerit points who additionally have been convicted of a serious driving-related offense should either be sentenced to jail or be forced to receive driver reeducation, since to do otherwise would be to allow a crime to go unpunished. Only if such drivers are likely to be made more responsible drivers should driver re-education be recommended for them. Unfortunately, it is always almost impossible to make drivers with a large number of demerit points more responsible drivers.

If the editorialist's statement is true, they provide the most support for which one of the following?

(A) Drivers with a large number of demerit points who have been convicted of a serious driving related offense should be sent to jail.

(B) Driver re-education offers the best chance of making drivers with a large number of demerit points responsible drivers,

(C) Driver re-education is not a harsh enough punishment for anyone convicted of a serious driving-related offense who has also accumulated a large number of demerit points.

(D) Driver re-education should not be recommended for those who have committed no serious driving-related offenses.

(E) Drivers with a large number of demerit points but not conviction for a serious driving-related offense should receive driver reeducation rather than jail.


My choice was "B" because the of one word in the last sentence. "Unfortunately, it is always almost impossible to make drivers with............."
the word "almost" leaves door for a doubt therefore I have chosen "B". But otherwise I would have gone with "A". Which is the correct answer to the question. Anyone agree with me on this? Any thoughts?
Thanks,

Hey mkarakum,

Thanks for posting - you know, this is one of those study situations in which you may lose the battle but set yourself up to win the war. The way you worked to eliminate choice A is exactly what we'd want you to do on the GMAT: look for a reason that an answer choice to an Inference problem is 'not necessarily true'.

The LSAT is a little more nuanced in its CR than is the GMAT (but then again the LSAT doesn't have math at all...), so this may be one of those cases in which LSAT questions are good study for the GMAT but may not be identical. For more on that topic, I highly recommend that you check out this blog series from instructor David Newland: http://www.beatthegmat.com/lsat-to-study-for-the-gmat-part-2-critical-reasoning-t69915.html

Here, I'd still argue that choice B isn't directly supported by the information (the author proposes two solutions - jail or re-education - but that doesn't mean that either is the most effective. What if electroshock therapy was the most effective, but considered too expensive or too inhumane? Just because the author didn't suggest it doesn't mean it's not an option...). And the way that the question is phrased ("provide the MOST support...") there may be a way in which the the answer doesn't have to be 100% (again, this is using LSAT burden-of-proof standards, of which I don't 100% know for certain). A is definitely pretty-well supported even it's not airtight, and I don't think you can say that about any of the others.


One more consideration - in the question the phrasing is "...it is (1) always (2) almost impossible...", but in your explanation you reverse the order ("it is (1) almost (2) always impossible...". Is it possible that the source of this question mistyped a keyword here or there? I don't know that that ordering is enough to change the "must be true" standard of proof here, but the fact that the question can be modified slightly in one transcription to the next means that there's a chance it was done before you received it, too...

Hi there,

I greatly appreciate your response and your explanations. I do understand why the correct answer is A, however I am still not convinced with the word "Always almost impossible"
IF that means Always impossible, then why do you need to put the word almost?
Think about it, when we say he almost made it, however he didnt, so the word almost tells me that there might be a slight chance that it is not the case.
Would you agree with that? If you do then the question is wrong.
I say always impossible is not the same as always almost impossible.

Hi Mkarakum,

Which LSAT book do you think more effective to improve the critical reasoning skill? Currently, I'm using Kaplan 2011 Premier. Also, are the questions in LSAT harder than the ones in GMAT?

Thanks,
Yvonne

Mkarakum -

This is David Newland. Brian referenced one of my postings on using the LSAT to study for the GMAT. I teach both tests on a regular basis and Brian is correct to reference the difference between the tests. The LSAT is more subtle by far. The GMAT has the conclusion at the end of the stimulus most of the time - on the LSAT the conclusion could be anywhere or there could be multiple conclusions. So it is important when studying the LSAT to understand how GMAT questions feel so that if a question does not seem to be a GMAT-style question you can leave it behind guilt-free (I mean it is a question for a different test so you don't have to get all of these right to have good practice with these questions. You can always say "oh, that wacky LSAT!)

Next let me say that these questions are given to a bunch of would-be lawyers AND unlike the GMAT students have a realistic process for challenging the validity of LSAT questions. Once every two of three tests a question will be "removed from scoring" that means one of these future lawyers attacked the question and had it removed. This question is from the October 1999 test, the second Logical Reasoning Section, #12. It has not been challenged to this day so it probably is not flawed.

I think that the word "almost" is there to make this more difficult and to try to distract you. This is not an easy question! The word that I would like to focus on is the word "likely" as in the conditional premise, "Only if such drivers are likely to be made more responsible drivers should driver re-education be recommended for them." Do you see that for this option "driver re-education to be recommended in this argument it has to be LIKELY that they would be made more responsible? Now look at the phrase in question - "it is ALWAYS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE to make drivers with a large number of demerit points more responsible drivers." By saying that it is ALWAYS (meaning every time) ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE (which is the exact opposite of likely) this premise essentially means that driver re-education is never warranted. So according to the argument that option is ruled out because it is always unlikely to result in more responsible driving. Since there were only two options - re-education and jail - we are left with jail and choice A is correct.

You are very smart to be looking to each word and what it means but for the GMAT this should really be applied to the conclusion more than the premises. On the GMAT "conclusion is king" and each word of the conclusion matters. On the LSAT you have to be on the lookout throughout the whole argument - very tiring!

Hope it helps! Good Luck!

David

Yvonne -

I would not recommend using an LSAT study guide like the one that you mentioned to study for the GMAT. When I discuss using LSAT questions for the GMAT - I mean just that Official LSAT questions, not the techniques that go with learning all of the different types of questions on the LSAT. You asked if LSAT questions are harder. The answer is overall "Yes." But that is not really the question - an LSAT question that is basically a hard version of a question you would see on the GMAT, such as a normal strengthen or weaken would be helpful to study. But an LSAT question that has no relationship to something on the GMAT might not be worthwhile. The thing about the LSAT is that the questions are much more diverse. Instead of buying an actual LSAT book from a prep company you would be better off studying GMAT Critical Reasoning from the two Veritas books and the Official Guide 12th Edition by GMAC and then IF you need extra practice simply buying one of the "10 actual official Prep Test" series from the Law School Admission Council. Remember it is still the GMAT you are taking and the GMAT Critical Reasoning is much friendlier and more polite than the LSAT. The GMAT has fewer types of questions, it has tendencies you can look for, and it is in general more straightforward.

David Newland