query 17

[monu123]

Mel: The official salary for judges has always been too low to attract the best
Candidates to the job. The legislature’s move to raise the salary has
done nothing to improve the situation, because it was coupled with
a ban on receiving money for lectures and teaching engagements.
Pat: No, the raise in salary really does improve the situation. Since very few
judges teach or give lectures, the ban will have little or no negative
effect.
Pat’s response to Mel is inadequate in that it
A. attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members
of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members.
B. mistakenly takes the cause of a certain change to be an effect of that change
C. attempts to argue that a certain change will have a positive effect merely
by pointing to the absence of negative effects
D. simply denies Mel’s claim without putting forward any evidence in support
of that denial
E. assumes that changes that benefit the most able members of a group
necessarily benefit all members of that group.

[hjafferi]

Imo A

[gmatissimple]

Why is the answer A?
I think the answer will be C.
Would any one explain?
Thanks.

[TaTum]

I think A is better, as the situation is to attract new candidates, not existing members.

[kabutar]

A:

attempts to assess how a certain change will affect potential members (Best candidates) of a group by providing evidence about its effect on the current members (Most current judges are not affected)

[Rising_Sun]

Imo C.

[vinscorpion]

I agree with A,. What is Official Answer?

[gcvbt7t]

A makes more sense

[Rising_Sun]

I think the effect of a change can safely be predicted taking evidence from the effect on the current members. So don't see inadequacy in the reasoning.

On the other hand, merely not having the negative effects of changes doesn't guarantee that the change will have positive effects.

Advice welcome!

[gmat009]

Imo A