For years, economists have thought that the Great Depression

'E' for me
The 1st boldface "For years, economists have thought that the Great Depression was triggered by rampant stock market speculation that led to unsustainable equity prices and overextended credit" is a conclusion which author rejects.
Thus we are left with one option i.e 'E' .

Why is the 1st statement a conclusion and not a theory / fact / evidence ?

think it like this --->there is some great depression that has happened and some group of people are trying to ascertain the cause of this great depression .they came up with the idea and explained that X is the cause ,now a different group comes up with a different cause and in a process derails the conclusion of the previous group --------->so effectively that the conclusion that gets rejected !!

Why is the first bold faced not an opinion - "economists have thought"? How can we tell that it is a conclusion? Based on this I opted for choice B and rejected E. Can you please explain? Thanks in advance

A conclusion is someone's opinion. It is not the first part of (B) that is a problem. It is the second boldface sentence which is not correct. The second boldface is not the author's conclusion. His conclusion is "The real culprit was the excessive reparations imposed on Germany after WWI". The second boldface supports this conclusion.

Yeah true. Thanks for the clarification .

Boldface questions are known to be notorious and usually linked with how well one is performing on the GMAT. However, if we pay attention to some concepts, they are not that difficult to crack. Before we start with this problem, here are certain things to understand:

Conclusion: It is an opinion of a person/body based on some facts and is always a judgement
Evidence: It is a piece of information given to us in the sentence.





Here we have two conclusions, one that the author rejects and one that the author accepts

Rejected Conclusion: Great Depression was triggered by rampant stock market speculation that led to unsustainable equity prices and overextended credit
Accepted Conclusion: The real culprit, it turns out, was the excessive reparations imposed on Germany after WWI

(A) The first offers evidence in support of a conclusion that the author subsequently refutes. The second is that conclusion.
We know that the first statement is the rejected conclusion
INCORRECT

(B) The first offers an opinion that the author rejects. The second is the author’s conclusion.
The first part is correct here. However, the second part is not the conclusion. It is a fact that supports the conclusion.
INCORRECT

(C) The first is a conclusion that the author ultimately accepts. The second is evidence in support of that conclusion.
This is wrong, the first part is the conclusion that the author rejects not accepts.
INCORRECT

(D) The first is evidence in support of a conclusion that the author denies. The second is a counter-conclusion that the author accepts.
This is again wrong. The first part is not an evidence, it is infact a conclusion
INCORRECT

(E) The first is a conclusion that the author rejects. The second is a evidence corroborating a conclusion that the author supports
The left out option. This has to be correct.
Yes, the first part is the conclusion that the author rejects and yes second part is an evidence that supports the conclusion
CORRECT

I am not convinced. How does the second part considered an evidence?

B is closer to me.

Let us consider the statements:

The real culprit, it turns out, was the excessive reparations imposed on Germany after WWI. These punitive measures bankrupted Germany and ultimately caused a cascade of private bank defaults.

Here, the first part is the conclusion, as it is an opinion of someone.
The second part talks about the reparation imposed and says that these measures bankrupted Germany. Hence it is a fact.

Does it help?

Conclusion : However, a recent book by Liaquat Ahamed refutes this theory. The real culprit, it turns out, was the excessive reparations imposed on Germany after WWI

Last Sentence - supports the author's conclusion.
First Sentence - Economists' opinion

Hence E

Imo E
The first statement is a conclusion that the argument is refuting by a recent book by Liaquat Ahamed .
The second is evidence that is used bay the author to support his conclusion that great depression was caused by harsh penalties imposed on Germany .

VERITAS PREP OFFICIAL SOLUTION:

Correct answer: (E)

This bold-faced argument provides us with one theory about the cause of the Great Depression, refutes it, and then supplies an alternative theory with evidence to corroborate it. The first bolded sentence is the rejected conclusion, while the second is the evidence in support of the alternative explanation.

A) The first sentence is a conclusion, not evidence. Furthermore, the author goes on to rebut this conclusion.

B) The second sentence is not a conclusion, but rather is evidence in support of the author’s conclusion.

C) The author does not accept the conclusion that stock market speculation caused the Great Depression.

D) The first sentence is a rejected conclusion, not evidence. The second isn’t the counter-conclusion, but rather the evidence in support of the counter-conclusion.

E) Correct.

Hi,
Option A = "evidence in support of a conclusion.." - reject this.
Option B = " second is a conclusion.." Nope it's not!
Option C= Like A , the first is not the conclusion the author accepts
Option D = "evidence..." Weird. Reject this
Option E = Makes sense. This is the answer
Hope this helps!

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.