Bunuel wrote:
Four neighboring countries produce a third of the world’s harvest of sugarcane. During the last decade, Vernia’s sugarcane output was greater than that of Brownland. However, because Sylvania had a greater output of sugarcane than Borodia’s, Vernia must have produced more sugarcane than Borodia.
If taken into consideration, any of the following makes the argument above logically correct EXCEPT:
A. Brownland’s sugarcane output was greater than Borodia’s.
B Vernia and Sylvania produced the same amount of sugarcane.
C. Vernia’s sugarcane output was less than that of Sylvania.
D Brownland and Sylvania produced the same amount of sugarcane.
E Sylvania produced less sugarcane than Brownland.
Choice C is the correct answer.
Given Points about sugarcane output- Vernia > Brownland
- Sylvania > Borodia
The author concludes based on the above that ->Vernia > Borodia
What we need to doIn 4 of the 5 choices given, the choice will ensure that the conclusion can be logically made. We need to find that one choice where, despite the choice, the conclusion is not logically sound.
ChoicesA. Brownland’s sugarcane output was greater than Borodia’s.i.e., Brownland > Borodia.
Because Vernia > Brownland, we can be sure that
Vernia > (Brownland) >
BorodiaThe conclusion is logical in this case. Reject choice A.
B Vernia and Sylvania produced the same amount of sugarcane.i.e., Vernland = Sylvania.
Because Sylvania > Borodia, we can be sure that
Vernia ( = Sylvania) >
Borodia.
The conclusion is logical in this case. Reject choice B.
C. Vernia’s sugarcane output was less than that of Sylvania.i.e., Sylvania > Vernia. Here is where things get interesting.
- We know that Sylvania > Borodia. We also know from choice C that Sylvania > Borodia. This only means that Sylvania is greater than both Vernia and Borodia. Can we be sure that Vernia > Borodia? No.
There are multiple possibilities.
1) Sylvania >
Borodia > Vernia > Brownland
2) Sylvania >
Vernia > Brownland >
Borodia3) Sylvania >
Vernia > Borodia > Brownland
So, unlike other choices, here, based on choice C, it is not logical to conclude that
Vernia > Borodia. Choice C seems solid. Hold.
D Brownland and Sylvania produced the same amount of sugarcane.i.e., Brownland = Sylvania.
Because Vernia > Brownland and Sylvania > Borodia, we can be sure that
Vernia > Sylvania (Brownland)
> BorodiaThe conclusion is logical in this case. Reject choice D.
E Sylvania produced less sugarcane than Brownland.i.e., Brownland > Sylvania.
Because Vernia > Brownland and Sylvania > Borodia, we can be sure that
Vernia > (Brownland > Sylvania)
> BorodiaThe conclusion is logical in this case. Reject choice E.
Hope this helps.
___
Harsha
Enthu about all things GMAT | Exploring the GMAT space | My website: gmatanchor.com