skamal7 wrote:
It is generally believed that an Indian tribe known as “The Red Paint People” first occupied the coast of Maine in approximately 3000 B.C. This name was given to the Indians because their graves contained quantities of a red pigment (iron ochre) that they presumably used to decorate their faces and bodies. However, recently discovered Indian grave sites on the coast of Maine that contain these same red pigments have been conclusively dated to 4000 B.C. Therefore, the “Red Paint People” must have occupied the coast of Maine much earlier than archaeologists previously believed.
In the argument above, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
The first is a commonly held belief that the argument seeks to refute; the second is evidence used in that refutation.
The first is a generalization that the argument accepts as true; the second is the main conclusion of the argument.
The first is evidence used to support a conclusion that the argument opposes; the second is the main conclusion of the argument.
The first is a conclusion that is generally accepted as true; the second is a conclusion that refutes it.
The first is an intermediate conclusion that is generally accepted as true; the second is the main conclusion of the argument.
OA after some good discussion
Whenever I see a BF question, I analyze the purpose of the BOLD statements. Once I do that, I almost nail it.
Here the two bold statements are:
1)It is generally believed that an Indian tribe known as “The Red Paint People” first occupied the coast of Maine in approximately 3000 B.C.
2)Therefore, the “Red Paint People” must have occupied the coast of Maine much earlier than archaeologists previously believed.
Now consider the entire stimulus.
The first BF is something sort of common belief, followed by a fact irrelevant to the purpose.
Then a counter idea has been introduced, explicitly made clear by the usage of "however". Based upon this idea, a conclusion has been punched. This is our second BF. This second BF refutes the first BF.
Now analyze the answer choices.
a) first part is fine, but second is not. 2nd BF is not an evidence.
b) first is not a generalization.
c) first is not an evidence,
d) bingo
e) I feel that both the conclusions are balanced, henceforth can't make one conclusion as intermediate and the other as rest. The thing happening here is that the second conclusion is refuting the first conclusion.
Regards,