Don’t lose your progress!

We cover every section of the GMAT with in-depth lessons, 5000+ practice questions and realistic practice tests.

Up to 90+ points GMAT score improvement guarantee

The best guarantee you’ll find

Our Premium and Ultimate plans guarantee up to 90+ points score increase or your money back.

Master each section of the test

Comprehensive GMAT prep

We cover every section of the GMAT with in-depth lessons, 5000+ practice questions and realistic practice tests.

Schedule-free studying

Learn on the go

Study whenever and wherever you want with our iOS and Android mobile apps.

The most effective way to study

Personalized GMAT prep, just for you!

Adaptive learning technology focuses on your academic weaknesses.

Critical Reasoning: Paradox Questions

A new computer program for three-dimensional modeling, which was meant to be the ultimate tool for product designers, was released onto the market after years of development. The program was extremely powerful, offering thousands of unique features, but most importantly it would prevent the user from rendering objects which were impossible to physically form due to illogical planes which were results of geometrical flaws in the work of the designer. The software company that created the program saw this last feature as vital in the process of product design and planned to become a leader in the market by basing a product on such a complex ability. Nevertheless, many design companies rejected the program after a few months of use, and returned to use competing products instead.

Which of the following, if true, does the most to explain why the plan failed to achieve its objective?       

Incorrect.

[[snippet]]

This answer choice does not provide us with any relevant information. The last premise tells us that design companies do use such programs. Therefore, many designers probably have no problem using computer programs to design objects.

Incorrect.

[[snippet]]

This statement would explain why no design programs are successful, and not why just the program in question was unsuccessful. If the program has competitors which are used by many design companies, then we can infer that product design must quite often entail the use of 3D modeling using a computer.

Incorrect.

[[snippet]]

The last premise tells us that many companies tried out the program. This gives us the impression that such companies are quite open-minded about trying new, unknown programs. This answer choice, therefore, contradicts the argument rather than resolves it.

Incorrect.

[[snippet]]

This answer choice emphasizes the paradox. It gives us another reason to believe that the program should have been very successful. We should be looking for a statement that can explain why the program was rejected by the design companies.

Bravo!

[[snippet]]

This answer choice lets us in on a characteristic of designers that the program fails to pay attention to. If designers need the freedom to create anything, then a program that prevents them from seeing certain ideas through, no matter how illogical they might be, is likely to aggravate them and limit their creativity.

Designers, often entering the professional field because of a love for drawing, sculpting and other physical art forms, are sometimes intimidated by or simply not attracted to using computer programs to design objects.
The process of product design can vary greatly in nature depending on company and designer, and does not always entail a large amount of three-dimensional computer modeling.
Many designers use three-dimensional modeling programs to express design concepts, and so need the freedom to create any thinkable shape, even those that cannot be formed in physical reality.
The software company did not take into account the fact that the design companies may not be that enthusiastic to assimilate a new program, however powerful it may be.
In a feature of the program, the geometrical flaws caused by the designer could be highlighted, allowing the designer to edit the operations causing those flaws, resulting in a physically logical object