Bunuel wrote:
The university's decision to scale back significantly its teaching of the literary and philosophical classics of the Western Tradition is misguided. Proponents of the move argue that today's students are not interested in these works and desire more practical business-related courses that will help them in their future careers. But any student lacking a sufficient grounding in the thought and tradition that underlie the present civilization cannot be said to be fully educated. The classics are the primary vehicle for instilling such knowledge.
Which of the following best expresses the relationship between the two bolded statements above?
A. The first statement offers a hypothesis and the second statement offers conflicting evidence.
B. The first statement suggests an alternative explanation for the phenomenon described in the second statement.
C. The second statement provides evidence for a conclusion drawn in the first statement.
D. The second statement must be true for the first statement to be true.
E. The second statement is an inference drawn from the first statement.
Flow of ideas in the stimulus is as under
1. Students not interested in Philo Classics , desire Prac. Business courses
2. BUT : Lacking these knowledge can not be called fully educated
3. Becase (2nd Bold) : Classics = Primary vehicle for instilling knowledge.
4. THUS (1st Bold) : Univs Decision to roll back Lit & Philo Classics is misguided.
1st Bold part is derived from 2nd Bold part(A) conflicting evidence. - Incorrect.
(B) alternative explanation - Incorrect
(C) Looks good keep for now
(D) Looks good keep for now
(E) inference drawn from the first statement- Incorrect.
Between (C) and (D) , in (C) "Primary vehicle for instilling knowledge" is a fact , hence this clealy provides evidence for the first bold part, answer must be (C).