Question
Tina: All other factors being equal, children whose parents earned doctorates are more likely to earn a doctorate than children whose parents did not earn doctorates.
George: But consider this: Over 70 percent of all doctorate holders do not have a parent that also holds a doctorate. Which of the following is the most accurate evaluation of Hari's reply?
George: But consider this: Over 70 percent of all doctorate holders do not have a parent that also holds a doctorate. Which of the following is the most accurate evaluation of Hari's reply?
Answer: Option C
:
C
George's 70 percent figure pretty much tells us that numbers and statistics is the name of the game here. We're asked to evaluate George's response to Tina, so let's see what Tina has in mind. Tina's statement is a comparison among individuals: If my parents have earned doctorates and yours didn't, then Tina says that the odds are better that I will earn a doctorate than you will. Tina's claim goes no further. She doesn't claim that children of doctors are guaranteed to earn doctorates, and she doesn't even claim that they are likely to earn doctorates. She merely claims that these children are more likely to earn doctorates than their counterparts who do not have a parent that earned a doctorate.
Thus the irrelevancy of George's 70 percent figure, which gives us information on a different group - those who already earned their doctoral degree. Because he has shifted the scope, the data George presents can be true and still have no bearing on Tina's claim. An example: Suppose that there are 10 people in the world with doctorates. Tina merely claims that children of these people are most likely to get doctorates than children of other people. George comes along and says that of the 10 people, say, 8 of them (over 70%) come from doctorate-less parents. Does that alter Tina's claim in any way? No. All other factors being equal, the children of those doctors could still likely to earn doctors, even if most doctorate holders don't have the particular heritage. Because of this, George's consideration doesn't contradict Tina's claim if any way, and we can therefore say that George's statement is consistent with it. (C) is theanswer.
Was this answer helpful ?
:
C
George's 70 percent figure pretty much tells us that numbers and statistics is the name of the game here. We're asked to evaluate George's response to Tina, so let's see what Tina has in mind. Tina's statement is a comparison among individuals: If my parents have earned doctorates and yours didn't, then Tina says that the odds are better that I will earn a doctorate than you will. Tina's claim goes no further. She doesn't claim that children of doctors are guaranteed to earn doctorates, and she doesn't even claim that they are likely to earn doctorates. She merely claims that these children are more likely to earn doctorates than their counterparts who do not have a parent that earned a doctorate.
Thus the irrelevancy of George's 70 percent figure, which gives us information on a different group - those who already earned their doctoral degree. Because he has shifted the scope, the data George presents can be true and still have no bearing on Tina's claim. An example: Suppose that there are 10 people in the world with doctorates. Tina merely claims that children of these people are most likely to get doctorates than children of other people. George comes along and says that of the 10 people, say, 8 of them (over 70%) come from doctorate-less parents. Does that alter Tina's claim in any way? No. All other factors being equal, the children of those doctors could still likely to earn doctors, even if most doctorate holders don't have the particular heritage. Because of this, George's consideration doesn't contradict Tina's claim if any way, and we can therefore say that George's statement is consistent with it. (C) is theanswer.
Was this answer helpful ?
More Questions on This Topic :
Latest Videos
Latest Test Papers
Submit Solution