vital

How do you determine what is the GMAT quality. Or lets say, How I can determine what is the Gmat quality? I took this question from "Prepare for Gmat" Barron's 10th edition ( book is pretty old, might this be the reason? )

We want the teacher to be him who has the best rapport with the students. A… B We want the teacher to be he C We want him to be the teacher D We desire that the teacher be him E We anticipate that the teacher will be him B is right. My choise was c. We want him to be the teacher who has the best rapport with the students. Do I change meaning of the sentence?

if you have access to is underlined , sorry

Anyone interested in the use of computers can learn much if you have access to a state-of-the art microcomputer A ..... B if he has access to C if access is available to D by access to E from access to b is right. What is worng with C?

Is it TRUE that ALL critical reasoning and writing issue topics are listed in Official Guide? And I will not get the OTHER topic on my GMAT test? Does it make sence to review every singe topic before the exam or they just provide general idea about the assigment on the exam? I hope that people who have already PASSED the test will help us with this question. Sorry, if I posted my question to the wrong forum. It was really hard for me to decide where is the rigth place for it. .

Thanks for help! But the question whether I need to know it! I have pretty big table in my Gmat book ( How to prepare for the Gmat, Barrons's 10th edition), and the book suggests to memorize it, but I did not have any problems with [tooltip=Official Guide]OG[/tooltip], since there are no questions that require to transform feet, inches or something else. So I am confused, I do not want to take in cram things that I will not need!!

I bet, somebody have already asked this question on the forum, but I could not find the answer anywhere: Do I need to know USA's measure system ( gallonns, quarts, inches,)? I get used to metric system, so I have no willingness to study something else. But some books ( ARCO, GMAT 2002) have several questions that ara dealing with transformation gallons into quarts or vice versa. What is about the REAL GMAT?

This is the question from Official Guide, it looks like they resemble each other. Nothing else I can suggest so far. 158 With only 5 percent of the world’s population, United States citizens consume 28% of its nonrenewable resources. B as C Being D Despite having E Although accounting for The word or phrase that begins this sentence establish the contrast between the size of the united states population and the activities of its citizens. Choice D confusingly constitute that United states somehow possess, rather than constitute 5 % of the world population. E is right 2 Paralel structure is the key as well obesity is a ... disorder .....or a condition 3 a is ambiguous b is not perfect, but undestandable

I am not so strong in grammar , as in logic, so here my logic if b is right, then d would be right too, because we can use both tenses( present and future, since both of them grammatically correct) So my choice is A

Here is my wrong line of reasoning. People are benevolent. Social evils come from instructions. ( People were corrupted, inspite of their benevolent intentions.) So IF we explain how benevolent dispositions give rise to evil institutions we will support the argument. MY Choise was D,which is WRONG. My suggestion for right reasoning is here: • be·nev·o·lent means Characterized by or suggestive of doing good. and it means philanthropic. so if we can persuad people to abandon technology, urbanization, and mass production we will support the fact that people are benevolent( or philanthropic ) Please, write me back do you find this reasoning reliable.

I remember this question, because I made same mistake ( decided that C was right). Here is my explanation: I do agree with the reasoning that profit is correlated with revenue. But we can go backwards as well: why do you think that advertisiing campaign was succesful? It might be the reason for growth in profits, but it might be a complete failure as well. So nothing supports that C is right.

Thanks for explanation. I was misled by the phrase: “Hearing a driver honk is not sufficient to draw any conclusion” and I could not understand explanation, since my first choice was different from the answer E that was suggested by the book

Here is the explanation from the book: The premise of this argument is presented as an if-then syllogism. The trick is that the sentence is inverted. It is easier to understand if you invert sentence to read, “if you don’t use Blind O Window, than honk”. With an if-then argument, a valid conclusion may be reached if you are told that the if clause is false. Therefore, knowing that a driver does not use Blind O window cleaner can result in conclusion that the driver will NOT honk. Conversely, knowing that the driver is not honking can result in a conclusion that the driver does use Blind O window. Hearing a driver honk is not sufficient to draw any conclusion, since that driver could be honking merely in relation to the traffic or for some other reason. Therefore, answer A is incorrect. This explanation sounds like another CR question for me. :)

An advertisement on a billboard displays the message to passing motorists, “Honk if you don’t use Blind-O Window Cleaner” Based on this advertisement, which of the following statements can be concluded? a) A driver who reads the sign and then honks in response to it must not use Blind-O Window Cleaner. b) A driver who does not use Blind-O Window Cleaner will honk after reading the sign. c) Based on this advertisement, it is possible to determine a motorist’s use of blind-O window Cleaner if that motorist does not honk after reading the sign. d) If a driver uses Blind-O window cleaner, he or she will not honk after reading the sign. e) A driver who reads the sign and then does not honk must not use Blind-O Window Cleaner The right answe is E. Source is Peterson's Logic Review. The question is standard: where is logic here? It is possible to come to this answer by excluding all the others. Is there a shotcut?

Some psychologists believe that humans, like porpoises, are benevolent creatures by nature. These psychologists assume that human nature is essentially disposed to benevolent conduct. To account for social evils, psychologists have to blame instructions that corrupt the native disposition of humans. The psychologists’ argument described above would be most strengthened if it were to explain how… A) A way of life consistent with benevolent ideas is possible in the modern world. B) People can be persuaded to abandon technology, urbanization, and mass production. C) Benevolent conduct can result from humans living in accordance with their own natural dispositions D) Benevolent dispositions give rise to evil institutions E) Corrupt institution can be eliminated or reformed The correct answer is B. Source is Logic review- Peterson’s I could not solve this problem; answer seems to help find logic behind it. But I am not sure. So I will not suggest anything so for.