Alan Vs Dylan! | GMAT Verbal Practice Question | Critical Reasoning Q4 | Identify the Reasoning скачать в хорошем качестве

Alan Vs Dylan! | GMAT Verbal Practice Question | Critical Reasoning Q4 | Identify the Reasoning

In this GMAT CR video, we explore a 'identify the reasoning' type question. This GMAT Verbal Practice question is part of a series of GMAT Verbal Practice questions that help GMAT aspirants prep for GMAT Critical Reasoning Questions of all sorts - strengthen the argument, weaken the argument, and evaluate the argument, and identify the reasoning. ========= Useful GMAT Prep Links ======== Learn from GMAT 99%ile tutors - 2 way Interactive Classes - GMAT Focus Edition https://gmat.wizako.com/GMAT-prep-onl... Curated GMAT Focus Edition Online Course from GMAT 780 & GMAT Q51 tutors https://gmat.wizako.com/gmat-online-c... Download FREE CR Starter Guide: wzko.in/CR-starter ===================== Question - Alan: In the last 15 years, most of the criminals who were convicted of theft or murder were from the lower income classes and had not completed high school. Therefore, the government has to spend more money on reducing poverty and increase funding to education. Because terrorism is the most severe of all crimes, such measures would bring down overall crime rate and reduce threat from terrorism. Dylan: A study that was conducted in a country known to produce a number of terrorists showed that on average the terrorists were better educated than the overall population and that they did not necessarily come from lower income classes. This is probably because crimes such as theft are committed for personal gain while terrorism is for political or religious gain. Options - A. Dylan changes the direction of the argument entirely by discussing the scenario in a different country B. Dylan partially agrees with Alan's reasoning but refutes his recommendation to the government C. Dylan converts a causal argument made by Alan into a generalization applicable universally D. Dylan challenges Alan's reasoning by explaining why two situations that Alan perceives as similar are not E. While Alan arrives at a conclusion by drawing an analogy, Dylan arrives at the same conclusion by refuting the analogy Chapters - 00:00 - Introduction 00:45 - Understanding the argument 04:41 - Breaking down Alan's argument 06:10 - Breaking down Dylan's argument 08:05 - Evaluating Option A 09:09 - Evaluating Option B 11:01 - Evaluating Option C 12:21 - Evaluating Option D 13:19 - Evaluating Option E 14:39 - Summary Subscribe for more GMAT Verbal and Quant content, GMAT practice questions, GMAT Study Plan updates @    / wizako   Schedule a free strategy session with our GMAT experts to ramp up your GMAT preparation: https://wzko.in/GmatStrategy Wizako's Live Online Classes for GMAT Quant and Verbal - Everything a Physical Classroom offers! More information @ https://wzko.in/live Free GMAT verbal practice and GMAT quant practice questions @ https://practice-questions.wizako.com... Schedule a free GMAT demo class right away: https://wzko.in/demo Sign up for the most comprehensive and affordable online GMAT course @ https://wzko.in/online Got 10 minutes? Get going with your GMAT prep. Take the FREE 10-minute GMAT sprint tests at https://wzko.in/ft Follow us on Instagram @   / wizakogmat   for regular GMAT updates!!