Few businesses will voluntarily implement environmental rotection measures that benefit the public if those measures reduce profitability. Even though such measures may cost less to implement than the total value of their benefits to society, the company making the decision bears all of the cost and receives little, if any, of the benefit. For example, XYZ Corporation has for the last 10 years refused to install smokestack filters to reduce the air pollution emitted by its factory, claiming that the cost would be prohibitive. Therefore, if such measures are to be implemented to protect the environment, they must be initiated by government regulation or intervention.
The bolded portions of the argument above perform which of the following functions?

1. The first phrase states the conclusion, and the second provides evidence, the truth of which supports the validity of the conclusion
2. The first phrase states a premise supporting the conclusion, and the second provides evidence, the falsity of which would disprove the first phrase.
3. The first phrase describes a general principle, and the second provides evidence countering that principle.
4. The first phrase states a claim supporting the conclusion, but for which no evidence is given, and the second describes an example supporting the conclusion.
5. The first phrase states a generalization supporting the conclusion, and the second cites an example supporting that generalization.


OA Why not D

OA is already present in the my post. please click on reveal. Also, could you please let me know how to tackle these kind of questions?

Hey All,

Great work on this one. I saw that the "General approach" question got asked on this one, so I thought I'd weigh in. This is an "evaluate the argument" type of question, and nsp is on the right track. Basically, you want to do your total outline WITHOUT PAYING ATTENTION TO THE BOLDS. Once you've done that, you can try to figure out where the bolds fit in with your outline. ALSO, very often, it is enough to simply differentiate between what pieces provide evidence of or support for something else, which are COUNTER-premises, and which are mere claims/conclusions. Let's try that here.

Few businesses will voluntarily implement environmental rotection measures that benefit the public if those measures reduce profitability. Even though such measures may cost less to implement than the total value of their benefits to society, the company making the decision bears all of the cost and receives little, if any, of the benefit. For example, XYZ Corporation has for the last 10 years refused to install smokestack filters to reduce the air pollution emitted by its factory, claiming that the cost would be prohibitive. Therefore, if such measures are to be implemented to protect the environment, they must be initiated by government regulation or intervention.

Conclusion: Measure to protect environment must be initiated by government
Premises: Biz won't help environment if hurts profits. XYZ = concrete example of that premise.

What you'll see here is that BOTH bolded statements end up in that premise area. Let's see if we can find the answer with that info alone.

The bolded portions of the argument above perform which of the following functions?

1. The first phrase states the conclusion, and the second provides evidence, the truth of which supports the validity of the conclusion
PROBLEM: Neither bold is a conclusion.

2. The first phrase states a premise supporting the conclusion, and the second provides evidence, the falsity of which would disprove the first phrase.
PROBLEM: Okay. So the general approach breaks down here, because this does describe the two as both types of premises. However, the falsity of the second piece would not disprove the generalization.

3. The first phrase describes a general principle, and the second provides evidence countering that principle.
PROBLEM: We don't have any counter-premises here, so this is wrong.

4. The first phrase states a claim supporting the conclusion, but for which no evidence is given, and the second describes an example supporting the conclusion.
PROBLEM: Like B, this one comes close. However, the second piece does not support the conclusion, but the premise before it.

5. The first phrase states a generalization supporting the conclusion, and the second cites an example supporting that generalization.
ANSWER: There we go, premise, then a derivative premise.

Hope that helps!

-t
_________________

Tommy Wallach | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | San Francisco

Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Reviews

Thanks for the explanation..

This type of questions is realy difficult!

I think a study of all possible answer choices would be helpful. Is there a collection?

fell for B

Tommy good work again. Your explanation is quite comprehensive. Thanks.

Hi Tommy,

Your answers are always comprehensive and we all appreciate them.

What I meant is, sometimes I answer a question wrongly not becuase I don't comprehend the question or passage, but becuase I fail to understand the answer choices. Since there is a vast variety of answer choices (such as A is premise and B is an example; A is a statement that counters the conclusion while B is the conclustion), it is useful for me to study the answer choices first :p Would there be any materials on that? Hope this makes sense to you. Thanks.

Thanks Tommy! Will practise more.

I fell for B because I thought if the evidence was false then the argument would not have stood its ground. But when I look at the the first statement carefully "Few businesses will voluntarily implement environmental rotection measures that benefit the public if those measures reduce profitability." the falsity of the evidence would not disprove the first phase. The First phrase says FEW companies would invest money in Env. Prot. Measures if the profitability is impacted and which would still hold good even if the evidence is false.

Which leaves the option E.

I am still not very clear on the word Generalization but will try to figure out.
_________________

-AD

The answer is E.
_________________

Formula of Life -> Achievement/Potential = k * Happiness (where k is a constant)

Find out what's new at GMAT Club - latest features and updates