Page 1 of 1 [ 9 posts ]
 Print view Previous topic | Next topic
Author Message
 Post subject: CR 1 #16, CR 2 #46Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 2:03 am

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:26 pm
Posts: 7
I am still a bit confused about these answers. They are similar in that they want to see necessary conditions vs sufficient conditions.

The answer to question CR 1 #16 is B, stating that the conclusion is not necessarily true. However, are we not to assume that all the information in the stimulus is true?

Similarly question CR 2 #46, to which the answer is A, says that the conclusion logically follows. However, the answer choice also had a "not necessarily true" answer choice, which could also be true, because Daphne might want to go to the park for another reason, in the same way in #16, there are other factors involved in getting into a top MBA program. The questions are similar in the wording, "one MUST have..." and "ONLY go to the park..." showing that these conditions MUST be met.

So if we are to assume that all information in the stimulus is true, then why isn't CR2 #46, not necessarily true but CR1 #16 logically follows? Why is there a discrepancy when the wording of both questions imply absolute conditions and one question can evade these conditions and the other cannot?

Thank you.

Top

 Post subject: Re: CR 1 #16, CR 2 #46Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 11:50 pm

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:26 pm
Posts: 7
Why is my question not being answered?

Top

 Post subject: Re: CR 1 #16, CR 2 #46Posted: Fri Oct 09, 2009 6:45 pm

Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 6:32 pm
Posts: 497
Sorry for the delay!

In the boldface Critical Reasoning questions, we have different parts of the stimulus. Often, the author gives us a couple of pieces of evidence, and then follows those with a conclusion. The conclusion may or may not follow directly from the evidence, and the conclusion may or may not necessarily be true based on the evidence. It is important to be able to distinguish between conclusions and evidence in these questions.

In #16, the conclusion is not necessarily supported by the evidence.
To gain acceptance, one must have qualifications A and B.
Alexis has A and B, so Alexis MUST be accepted. The problem here is that having qualifications A and B are necessary for acceptance, but not sufficient for acceptance.

In #46, we know that Daphne will ONLY go to the park if Ernie goes.
Ernie will NOT go to the park UNLESS Frank brings his dog.
Frank will not be bringing his dog. There is no room for "other reasons" in these statements, as they're given in the stimulus. Thus, the conclusion, "Daphne will not go to the park today" is definitely supported by the evidence.

Veritas Help

Top

 Post subject: Re: CR 1 #16, CR 2 #46Posted: Sat Oct 10, 2009 12:54 am

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:26 pm
Posts: 7
Thank you for elucidating that.

Top

 Post subject: Re: CR 1 #16, CR 2 #46Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 9:04 pm

Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:24 pm
Posts: 3
Could you pls explain question 16 in more detail as I'm still confused between "sufficient" and "necessary" ?

My outcome here out of the explanation is that due to the first portion [the evidence] not mentioning Alex qualification [ e.g 95th percentile & 5yrs experience] , the conclusion is not necessarily true based on the evidence.

Is that right? more explanation needed pls... preferably starting with the definition and difference between sufficient and necessary.

Top

 Post subject: Re: CR 1 #16, CR 2 #46Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 9:10 pm

Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:24 pm
Posts: 3
I can't find CR2 #46 in the "prep on demand". Is it still available? Problem is only up to 34.

Top

 Post subject: Re: CR 1 #16, CR 2 #46Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 9:13 pm

Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 6:32 pm
Posts: 497
CR2 #46 is in the blue textbooks.

A sufficient condition is one that, if true, guarantees a conclusion. For example, if we know that Jacob has been given a letter of acceptance to XYZ business school, then we know that he has the option of choosing to attend that business school.

On the other hand, a necessary condition is one that, if true, means an outcome is possible, but not necessarily guaranteed. For example, if Jacob has taken the GMAT test, it does not mean he has been accepted to business school. However, taking the GMAT is a necessary step in the process to become accepted -- it's just not enough on its own.

Veritas Help

Top

 Post subject: Re: CR 1 #16, CR 2 #46Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 9:41 pm

Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:24 pm
Posts: 3

In regards to fully understanding the problem, i dont think i got the full grasp of it yet. So....
A good way would be turning the evidence in #16 into a sufficient condition so answer A would be the correct answer. I think this would give a clear picture of the difference...Can an example of the following be shown please?

Top

 Post subject: Re: CR 1 #16, CR 2 #46Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 5:27 pm

Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2009 6:32 pm
Posts: 497
Please contact us at 800 816 8374 (Monday - Thurs 7pm - 11pm), Friday (1pm - 6pm), Saturday (1pm - 3pm), Sunday (8pm - 10pm) (Eastern US times) or email help@veritasprep.com and we will be happy to explain further.

-- VeritasPrep Help

Top

 Display posts from previous: All posts1 day7 days2 weeks1 month3 months6 months1 year Sort by AuthorPost timeSubject AscendingDescending
 Page 1 of 1 [ 9 posts ]

 All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ]

#### Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

 You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum

 Search for: