Engineers are investigating the suitability of Wantastiquet Pass as the site of a new bridge. ███████ ███ ███████ ██ ███████ ███████ █████ ██████████ ██████ ███ ████████ ████████████ ████ ██████████ ███ ███ ███████ ██ ███████ ██ ███ ███████ ████████ ████ ███████ ███ █████████ ███ ██████ ████ ███ ██████ ███████ ██████████ ██████ ████████ █████ ███ █████ ██████ ████ ████████ ███████ ██ █████ ███ █ █████ ███ ████████
Resolve, reconcile, and explain questions read like a riddle – they present us with two facts that seem inconsistent, then ask us how they could both be true. Here are those facts:
Fact 1: Both reports are accurate.
Fact 2: One says erosion is low, and the other says erosion is high.
Personally, the anticipation phase stumped me. In hindsight I think it’s doable up front, though – one singular element can’t be both high and low, so they must be talking about two different elements of erosion.
Solving the riddle up front is convenient, but not necessary. As long as you have the puzzle framed clearly in your head and you’ve taken a beat to noodle on it, you’ll be well-positioned to recognize the solution when it appears in the answer choices.
Which one of the following, ██ █████ ████ █████ ██ ███████ ███ ████ ███████ █████ ██ █████████
Neither report presents ██ █████████ ████████ ████████ ██ ███ ████ ██ ███ ███████
We need to find some distinction between the two reports that would explain their different results. (A) applies to both reports equally, and therefore can’t provide a basis for differences between them.
Both reports include █████████████████ █████████ ████████████
We need to find some distinction between the two reports that would explain their different results. (B) applies to both reports equally, and therefore can’t provide a basis for differences between them.
One report was ████████ ██ ██████████ ████ █ ███████████ █████ ███ █████ ██████ ███ ████████ ██ ██████████ ████ █ ███████ ██████████ █████
(C) provides a difference between the reports, but not one that explains why the results came back accurate yet different. Perhaps the “private consulting firm” element suggests bias in that firm’s results, which would be fine except we’re told the firm’s results are accurate. (C)’s added information leaves the core puzzle in place.
One report focuses ██ ████████ ███████ ████████ █████ ███ █████ ██████ ███████ ██ █████████ ███████ █████████ ████ ████████ ███████
Two types of erosion! This allows both reports to be accurate while making seemingly-inconsistent claims: topsoil erosion is low, while riverbank erosion is high.
This reminds me of the parable of the blind men and the elephant, where they’re each feeling different parts of the elephant and saying things like “the object is long and floppy” (feeling its trunk), and “the object is sturdy like a tree” (feeling its leg). Both statements are true, despite seeming inconsistent, because the thing itself is multi-faceted.
One report cost ██████ █████ ██ ████ ██ ███████ ██ ███ ███ █████ ███████
If we didn’t know both these reports were accurate, perhaps this would suggest that one of the reports was low-effort or untrustworthy in its results. But we know both reports are accurate. Information about costs doesn’t help us solve the core puzzle, which is how these two reports could say different things while remaining accurate.
Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.
It takes about five minutes.
Take the free diagnosticWant to know why the right answer is right?
7Sage membership unlocks explanations of every question. Every answer choice. On every official PrepTest. Start with a free account.
By signing up you agree to our
terms of service.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy
and
Terms of Service
apply.