VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
sondenso wrote:
Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce crop plants that are highly resistant to insect damage. Unfortunately, the seeds themselves are quite expensive, and the plants require more fertilizer and water to grow well than normal ones. Thus, for most farmers the savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilizer. However,since consumer demand for grains, fruits, and vegetables grown without the use of pesticides continues to rise, the use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread.
In the argument given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
(A) The first supplies a context for the argument; the second is the argument's main conclusion.
(B) The first introduces a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second is a state of affairs that the argument denies will be part of that outcome.
(C) The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs againstthat prediction.
(D) The first provides a certain outcome that the agrument seeks to weigh against; the second is a consideration that support the main conclusion.
(E) The first and the second each provide evidence to support the argument's main conclusion.
Responding to a pm:
What is the essence of the argument?
Genetically modified seeds are highly resistant to insects. But they are more expensive and need more fertilizer and water. So
farmers won't save money by using them (prediction).
But people like them so
their use will keep increasing (conclusion).
So what part is in bold? Let me underline it to show clearly...
Genetically modified seeds are highly resistant to insects. But
they are more expensive and need more fertilizer and water. So
farmers won't save money by using them (prediction).
But
people like them so [i]their use will keep increasing (conclusion)
(A) The first supplies a context for the argument; the second is the argument's main conclusion.
Wrong - second is not the main conclusion
(B) The first introduces a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second is a state of affairs that the argument denies will be part of that outcome.
Wrong - the second is not related to the outcome at all. It cannot accept or deny whether it is a part of that outcome
(C) The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that prediction.
Wrong - second is not a consideration against the prediction. Prediction is about saving money by using modified seeds. Just because people like modified seeds, farmers won't save money by using them i.e. the cost will not go down. Note that the revenue farmers earn may increase because people like these seeds but the cost of using them will not decrease.
(D) The first provides a certain outcome that the agrument seeks to weigh against; the second is a consideration that support the main conclusion.
Correct.
(E) The first and the second each provide evidence to support the argument's main conclusion.
Wrong - First does not provide evidence to support conclusion
Responding to a pm:
Quote:
Hi there,
What do you think about the explanation provided by
Manhattan Prep?
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... t2270.html
The answer choices are slightly different, but that doesn't seem to have an impact on the reasoning (basically, they say it's C and you say it's not C).
The answer choice I selected was D however, the wording is not the same as the one on this page/discussion.
My option D states: The first provides evidence to support a prediction that the argument seeks to defend; the second is that prediction.
Option C appears to be consistent on all three pages (this page, Manhattan and mine).
Boldface questions are my weakest in Verbal and I am still torn between D and C.
The conclusion of the argument is the author's opinion. It is the reason he writes the argument. I disagree with the explanation provided in the link above. The conclusion of this argument is "their use will keep increasing" - that is the final word of the author. He starts by giving the drawbacks but provides a reason which he believes will overshadow the drawbacks and arrives at the conclusion that the use of genetically modified seeds will keep increasing.
"Thus, for most farmers the savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilizer." is a prediction based on the drawbacks he discusses, not the conclusion of the argument.
(C) is wrong as discussed above.
(C) The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that prediction.
Wrong - second is not a consideration against the prediction. Prediction is about saving money by using modified seeds. Just because people like modified seeds, farmers won't save money by using them i.e. the cost will not go down. Note that the revenue farmers earn may increase because people like these seeds but the cost of using them will not decrease.
(D) is correct
(D) The first provides a certain outcome that the agrument seeks to weigh against; the second is a consideration that support the main conclusion.
The argument says "their use will keep increasing". The argument weighs against the drawbacks in the first three lines.
The second bold face supports the main conclusion.
_________________
Karishma Bansal - ANA PREP
*SUPER SUNDAYS!* - FREE Access to ALL Resources EVERY Sunday
REGISTER at ANA PREP
(Includes access to Study Modules, Concept Videos, Practice Questions and LIVE Classes)
YouTube Channel
youtube.com/karishma.anaprep