jenniferreisig Wrote:All of the answer choices gave us inference options of "some" and "most". I eliminated B, D & E right away because we can't make any inference that most anyone does anything. There are no absolutes mentioned (all or none) so we need to rely on "most" to make any inferences - and at best two mosts could be inferred to as "some", A & C. The conclusion of the stimulus is that a majority (or most) of the people make a profit. The only other "most" mentioned in the stimulus were those who invest without doing any research. Therefore, the only inference you can get from any of this is that some people make a profit do so without any research - A.
Those were my thoughts too when I eliminated B, D, and E. I have learned about this technique in my prep-company but sometimes it gets confusing. We can eliminate B, D, and E because the argument contained quantifiers such as "some" and "most" ; not strong quantifiers such as "all" or "none" , right? you mentioned there is only "most" statements but there was also "some" statements. By the way, does this approach work on all question types? thats what I have been told but I am always afraid of messing up if I apply it. It was easier to apply it for this argument since it relied heavily on quantifiers.
Also, can someone further elaborate on answer choice C? I read the above explanations on it but I'm still confused. Its been said that we cannot make an inference about the people who do some research of their own, yet rely only on broker advice or hunches. If we cannot make inference about those people then how can we make inference about those who do research on their own?
During review I thought maybe another problem with C could be that it's talking about "investment research" whereas the argument does not specify what type of research. I doubt this is the problem because it just seems like common sense to assume the argument is talking about investment research and it is way early in the section to be picky about details.
Also, the reason why I did not like A is because it looks like an incorrect negation. Although I did not use logical chain (dislike them), the answer choice started off with people who make a profit. However, the argument's conclusion (necessary) is about people who make a profit so the answer choice is placing the necessary into the sufficient spot?