Examkin

Question

Difficulty: HardIdentifying Argumentative Strategies and Methods of Reasoning

Dr. Vance: To protect rare historical manuscripts from ambient humidity, the central archive should immediately install industrial dehumidifiers. Just as sealed glass display cases preserve delicate oil paintings in museums by maintaining a rigid microclimate, controlling humidity across our entire facility will ensure the long-term survival of these paper artifacts.

Dr. Kim: However, sealed glass cases regulate tiny, enclosed volumes of air, whereas industrial dehumidifiers in vast facilities draw in variable external air, creating localized moisture spikes that accelerate paper warping.

Which of the following best describes the method of reasoning used by Dr. Kim in responding to Dr. Vance's proposal?

  1. A
    Rejecting a general conservation principle on the grounds that paper artifacts and oil paintings are composed of different physical materials.
  2. B
    Accepting the opponent's core premise while arguing that the proposed timeline for equipment installation is unmanageable.
  3. Demonstrating that an analogy relied upon to justify a policy fails because of a critical difference in operating scale and mechanism.Answer
  4. D
    Treating a subsidiary observation regarding localized moisture spikes as though it were the main conclusion of the opponent's argument.
  5. E
    Offering empirical evidence to show that oil paintings do not actually benefit from being displayed in sealed glass cases.

Answer

Demonstrating that an analogy relied upon to justify a policy fails because of a critical difference in operating scale and mechanism.
Dr. Vance attempts to justify a facility-wide humidity control policy by drawing a direct analogy to sealed museum display cases. Dr. Kim counters this argument by establishing a critical distinction between the two scenarios: sealed cases control tiny, isolated air volumes, whereas facility dehumidifiers process fluctuating ambient air in large spaces. By demonstrating that this difference in scale and mechanism produces harmful moisture spikes, Dr. Kim shows that the underlying analogy fails to support the proposed action.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the first speaker's argument structure
Dr. Vance proposes installing industrial dehumidifiers for an entire facility, relying on an analogy to sealed glass cases that preserve paintings.
Identifying the premise-argument structure and the comparative analogy is essential to understanding the strategy being attacked.
2
Analyze the second speaker's rebuttal technique
Dr. Kim points out that sealed glass cases operate on small enclosed volumes, whereas industrial dehumidifiers operate in large open spaces with fluctuating outside air, leading to moisture spikes.
This establishes that Dr. Kim is identifying a key functional breakdown between the source case (glass cases) and the target case (facility-wide system).
3
Select the choice that abstractly describes this logical strategy
The correct response accurately captures that Dr. Kim refutes the proposal by showing why the drawn analogy fails at a fundamental operational level.
GMAT Method of Reasoning questions require matching specific argument steps to abstract structural descriptions.

Key Concept

Method of Reasoning: Invalidating an Analogy via Structural Differences
Estimated Time:2m 0s
Rate this question

Topics

Identifying Argumentative Strategies and Methods of Reasoning

More questions from this topic