imo D

D it is!!

I think its "C"
_________________

It isn't about the opportunities one gets, Its all about the opportunities one takes !

Yes the OA is D. GMAT is playing hard !

Historian Position : A more cautious conclusion than this is called for. this means that historian has differed from the previous position and hence is calling for a CAUTIOUS conclusion.

Previous Position : Newton's and Leibnitz's discoveries were independent. (Traditional view)

Researcher's position : Historians are dead wrong. (Traditional view is false)

A. The first provides evidence in support of the overall position that the historian defends; the second is evidence that has been used to support an opposing position.

Problem : The first bold part is the evidence in support of the Researcher’s position. Historians don't defend Researcher’s position.

B. The first provides evidence in support of the overall position that the historian defends; the second is that position.

Problem : The first bold part is the evidence in support of the Researcher’s position. Historians don't defend Researcher’s position. The second is an evidence NOT the position.

C. The first provides evidence in support of an intermediate conclusion that is drawn to provide support for the overall position that the historian defends; the second provides evidence against that intermediate conclusion.

Problem : The first bold part is the evidence in support of the Researcher's position which is NOT defended by the historian. There is no intermediate conclusion.

D. The first is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion that the historian criticizes; the second is evidence offered in support of the historian’s own position.

Answer. The first bold part is the evidence in support of the Researcher's conclusion which is criticized by the historian . The second bold part is evidence in support of the historian’s position

E. The first is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion that the historian criticizes; the second is further information that substantiates that evidence.

Problem : The first bold part is the evidence in support of the Researcher’s position. The second bold part is the evidence itself NOT the "information that substantiates that evidence."
That was very lengthy !
_________________

Please press kudos if you like my post.

I went for E!
_________________

Trying hard to achieve something unachievable now....

Definitely an interesting question. This was one of the 700 level ones I am assuming? It was easy to miss the intricacies. Good job. +1!

Traditional view: Discoveries by Newton and Leibniz were independent.

Scholar's view: Traditional view is false.
Premises in support of scholar's view:
1) the book includes a presentation of Newton’s calculus concepts and techniques
2) the notes were written before Leibniz’ own development of calculus concepts and techniques

Historian's view: A more cautious conclusion than this (Scholar's conclusion) is called for, however.
Premise in support of Historian's view:
Leibniz’ notes are limited to early sections of Newton’s book, sections that precede the ones in which Newton’s calculus concepts and techniques are presented.

Hence D.

wow very challenging

Awesome question. It has to be D. Got confused on what was the Historian's stand. Took me six minutes to figure out :D.
_________________

-AD

well the intermediate conclusion does not really support the main position of the argument.Options A to C are clearly POE'ed.


Option D is clear as there is a criticism done by the author more so he provides an evidence too to support his claim.
_________________

Visit -- http://www.sustainable-sphere.com/
Promote Green Business,Sustainable Living and Green Earth !!