e-GMAT Logo
NEUR
N

Banker: My country's laws require every bank to invest in its local community by lending money to local businesses, providing...

GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions

Source: Official Guide
Critical Reasoning
Misc.
HARD
...
...
Notes
Post a Query

Banker: My country's laws require every bank to invest in its local community by lending money to local businesses, providing mortgages for local home purchases, and so forth. This is intended to revitalize impoverished local communities. But it is clear that the law will soon entirely cease to serve its intended purpose. An increasing number of banks incorporated in our country exist solely on the Internet and are not physically located in any specific community.

The banker's argument is most vulnerable to criticism on which of the following grounds?

A
It overlooks the possibility that most banks that are physically located in specific communities in the banker's country are not located in impoverished communities.
B
It takes for granted that a law that ceases to serve its originally intended purpose no longer serves any other beneficial purpose, either.
C
It confuses a condition that would, if present, be likely to produce a given effect, with a condition that would probably be the cause if that effect were present.
D
It overlooks the possibility that even if there is a strong correlation between two phenomena, neither of those phenomena are necessarily causally responsible for the other.
E
It fails to adequately address the possibility that an increase in the number of banks of one kind in the banker's country will not lead to the complete elimination of banks of another kind.
Solution

Passage Analysis:

Text from Passage Analysis
My country's laws require every bank to invest in its local community by lending money to local businesses, providing mortgages for local home purchases, and so forth.
  • What it says: Banks must invest in their local communities through loans and mortgages
  • What it does: Sets up the current legal requirement that banks must follow
  • What it is: Legal background/context
This is intended to revitalize impoverished local communities.
  • What it says: The law's goal is to help poor communities get better
  • What it does: Explains the purpose behind the legal requirement we just learned about
  • What it is: Author's explanation of legislative intent
But it is clear that the law will soon entirely cease to serve its intended purpose.
  • What it says: The law will completely stop working for its intended goal
  • What it does: Makes a strong prediction that contradicts the law's purpose
  • What it is: Author's main claim/conclusion
An increasing number of banks incorporated in our country exist solely on the Internet and are not physically located in any specific community.
  • What it says: More banks are online-only with no physical location in any community
  • What it does: Provides the evidence to support why the law will stop working
  • What it is: Supporting evidence/premise
  • Visualization: Traditional banks: ???? (Physical location) → Local community investment ✓
    Online banks: ???? (No physical location) → No specific local community?

Argument Flow:

"The banker starts by explaining the current law requiring community investment, then states its purpose of helping poor communities. Next, he makes a bold prediction that this law will completely fail, and finally provides evidence about the rise of online-only banks to support this prediction."

Main Conclusion:

"The law requiring banks to invest in local communities will soon entirely cease to serve its intended purpose of revitalizing impoverished areas."

Logical Structure:

"The argument assumes that because online banks have no physical location, they cannot or will not be able to invest in any local community. The evidence (online banks increasing) is supposed to prove the conclusion (law will fail completely)."

Prethinking:

Question type:

Misc. (Flaw/Vulnerability) - This is asking us to identify what makes the banker's argument weak or flawed

Precision of Claims

The banker makes an absolute claim that the law will 'entirely cease to serve its intended purpose' and uses the qualifier 'clear' to suggest certainty

Strategy

For flaw questions, we need to identify gaps in the banker's reasoning. The banker assumes that online banks can't invest in local communities just because they lack physical locations. We should look for ways this assumption could be wrong or how the argument jumps to conclusions without considering alternatives

Answer Choices Explained
A
It overlooks the possibility that most banks that are physically located in specific communities in the banker's country are not located in impoverished communities.

Choice A: This choice suggests the argument overlooks that most physical banks aren't in impoverished communities. However, this misses the point of the argument. The banker isn't concerned about where existing banks are located, but rather about the trend toward online-only banks that have no physical community presence at all. Whether current banks are in poor or wealthy areas doesn't address the core issue the banker raises about online banks.

B
It takes for granted that a law that ceases to serve its originally intended purpose no longer serves any other beneficial purpose, either.

Choice B: This choice says the argument assumes a law that stops serving its original purpose can't serve any other beneficial purpose. While this might be a minor flaw, it's not the main vulnerability. The banker's focus is specifically on whether the law will serve its intended purpose of community revitalization, not whether it might have other benefits. This doesn't capture the core logical gap in the reasoning.

C
It confuses a condition that would, if present, be likely to produce a given effect, with a condition that would probably be the cause if that effect were present.

Choice C: This choice describes confusing a condition likely to produce an effect with a condition that would probably cause that effect if present. This is about mixing up correlation and causation in a specific way, but the banker's argument isn't really making this type of logical error. The banker is making a prediction based on a trend, not confusing different types of causal relationships.

D
It overlooks the possibility that even if there is a strong correlation between two phenomena, neither of those phenomena are necessarily causally responsible for the other.

Choice D: This choice points to overlooking that correlation doesn't imply causation between two phenomena. Again, this isn't the main issue here. The banker isn't claiming that two correlated phenomena cause each other; rather, he's arguing that one trend (more online banks) will lead to a specific outcome (law becoming ineffective).

E
It fails to adequately address the possibility that an increase in the number of banks of one kind in the banker's country will not lead to the complete elimination of banks of another kind.

Choice E: This correctly identifies the flaw. The banker assumes that an increase in online banks will lead to the complete elimination of traditional banks with physical locations. The argument jumps from 'increasing number of online banks' to 'the law will entirely cease to serve its purpose' without considering that both types of banks can coexist. Traditional banks with physical locations could continue operating and fulfilling the law's requirements even as online banks become more numerous. The word 'entirely' in the conclusion makes this oversight particularly significant.

Rate this Solution
Tell us what you think about this solution
...
...
Forum Discussions
Start a new discussion
Post
Load More
Similar Questions
Finding similar questions...
Previous Attempts
Loading attempts...
Similar Questions
Finding similar questions...
Parallel Question Generator
Create AI-generated questions with similar patterns to master this question type.