Menu
Mashika: We already know from polling data that some segments of the electorate provide significant support to Ms. Puerta. If those segments also provide significant support to Mr. Quintana, then no segment of the electorate that provides significant support to Mr. Quintana provides significant support to Mr. Ramirez.
Salim: But actually, as the latest polling data conclusively shows, at least one segment of the electorate does provide significant support to both Mr. Quintana and Mr. Ramirez.
Among the following statements, which is it most reasonable to infer from the assertions by Mashika and Salim?
Option A
Option B
Option C
Option D
Option E
(This question is from Official Guide. Therefore, because of copyrights, the complete question cannot be copied here. The question can be accessed at GMAT Club)
Mashika: We already know from polling data that some segments of the electorate provide significant support to Ms. Puerta.
Polling data shows that some segments of the electorate support a candidate P.
If those segments also provide significant support to Mr. Quintana, then no segment of the electorate that provides significant support to Mr. Quintana provides significant support to Mr. Ramirez.
Mashika adds a conditional. If segments that support P also support Q, then no segment that supports Q also supports R. (It’s a complex idea. Take a pause here to assimilate it).
Salim: But actually, as the latest polling data conclusively shows, at least one segment of the electorate does provide significant support to both Mr. Quintana and Mr. Ramirez.
Salim starts his sentence with ‘but’. He has a counterpoint. He states that at least one segment supports both Q and R.
What does Salim counter? He counters that the ‘then’ case of Mashika’s conditional does not hold.
Mashika: If A happens, then B happens.
Salim: But B hasn’t happened.
(Salim indicates that A hasn’t happened.)
Gist:
Some segments support P.
If the P supporting segments also support Q, then no segment supports Q AND R.
Turns out, there is at least one segment that supports both Q and R.
We are looking for something that must be true based on the assertions made by the two guys.
Salim asserts that the consequence that Mashika mentions in her conditional is actually not the case. Thus, it can be inferred that the ‘if condition’ Mashika put forth does not hold. i.e. not all P-supporting segments also support Q. There could, of course, be other inferences as well.
(A) Incorrect. We can’t say. There is nothing given that will enable us to infer this. It is possible that all segments support either Q or R.
(B) Correct. This is exactly what we discussed above. This inference does follow Salim’s reply to Mashika’s assertions. If the ‘then case’ is not true, that must mean that the ‘if condition’ is not true.
(C) Incorrect. We know from the passage that ‘some’ segments support P. We can also infer that not all P-supporting segments also support Q. These are not enough to infer that all segments support P.
(D) Incorrect. This is untrue based on the given information. As discussed above, there is at least one segment that supports P but not Q. Thus, there is at least one segment that does not support Q.
(E) Incorrect. While it is possible that all segments support R, it is not something that can be inferred without a doubt.
If we’re given a conditional: If A occurs then B occurs
If A occurs, we can infer that B also occurs
If B does not occur, we can infer that A did not occur
If B occurs, we cannot infer that A occurred. i.e., A may or may not occur.
If A does not occur, we cannot infer that B will not occur. i.e., B may or may not occur.
This question also deals with the concept of negation.
The ‘if condition’ says: all segments that support P also support Q. To say that the condition does not hold, we just need to go as far as to show that the statement is not true. We do not need to go the opposite extreme.
Statement: All segments that support P also support Q
The statement is false implies: Not all segments that support P also support Q. In other words, some segments that support P do not support Q.
The statement is false does not imply: No segment that supports P also supports Q.
This solution was created by Chiranjeev Singh and Anish Passi.
If you have any doubts regarding any part of this solution, please feel free to ask in the comments section.
Learn GMAT the right way – through common sense and logic. There’s no shortcut to a well-deserved success!
© 2021 All rights Reserved.
Hi sir
i did not understand the explaination 🙁
Okay 🙂
Leave a comment