Hihi~sdcar2010 Firstly, thanks so much for sharing such wonderful things. To tell the truth,logic is alwarys the pain in my neck~Hard is trying to figure out what the "key point"is in tackling the problems~here is a question from OG 12th( critical reasoning NO.107)
Last year all refuse collected by Shelbyville city services was incinerated. This incineration generated a large quantity of residual ash. In order to reduce the amount of residual ash Shelbyville generates this year to half of last year’s total, the city has revamped its collection program. This year city services will separate for recycling enough refuse to reduce the number of truckloads of refuse to be incinerated to half of last year’s number. Which of the following is required for the revamped collection program to achieve its aim? (A) This year, no materials that city services could separate for recycling will be incinerated. (B) Separating recyclable materials from materials to be incinerated will cost Shelbyville less than half what it cost last year to dispose of the residual ash. (C) Refuse collected by city services will contain a larger proportion of recyclable materials this year than it did last year. (D) The refuse incinerated this year will generate no more residual ash per truckload incinerated than did the refuse incinerated last year. (E) The total quantity of refuse collected by Shelbyville city services this year will be no greater than that collected last year.
I chose A) here is my reason:the new collection program must make sure that recycling would not lay out new ash, thereby no materials that city services could separate for recycling will be incinerated.
I understand why D) is right ,which seems more reasonable than A) but I still need more digging about A)
A) is too strict for a necessary assumption. Focus on the main conclusion. Let's say if you do A), you would cut the amount of refuse to be incinerated to only 10% (90% recycled). Great. But is that NECESSARY to reach the goal of cutting it to 50%? No. If you let part of the collected recyclable trash to be burnt (let's say 20% among the 90% collected), you can still reach the cutting to 50% goal since you still saved 70% of the trash from burning. Thus, A) is not a necessary assumption.
LS and LSS, both of you missed the point of taking GMAT. You have to demonstrate both a strong command of the English language and the faculty of logical reasoning to become an attractive candidate for MBA programs. Strong English communication skill is a NECESSARY condition for a successful MBA study. If your English level is to the point of now knowing what a GMAT CR question is talking about, you should postpone your quest on the MBA journey and improve your language fundamentals instead.
As to how to enhance your English skills, I have posted quite a few posts at the TOEFL forum if you care to know:
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2011-7-25 21:32:01
Hard is trying to figure out what the "key point"is in tackling the problems~here is a question from OG 12th( critical reasoning NO.107)
楼主
