Last visit was: 08 Sep 2026, 13:09 It is currently 08 Sep 2026, 13:09
Home
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2   3   4   5   
705-805 (Hard)|   Bold Face CR|         
User avatar
PulkitSaran
User avatar
Joined: 10 Apr 2021
Last visit: 20 Aug 2026
Posts: 34
Own Kudos:
28
Given Kudos: 437
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Posts: 34
Kudos: 28
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 4): Professor: Wittgenstein formulated 09 Jul 2026, 10:26
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
Professor: Wittgenstein formulated concepts pertaining to the metaphysics of language, and Russell developed closely analogous concepts on the same subject. The traditional opinion among scholars holds that these two philosophers developed their concepts independently of each other. Historians have, however, uncovered Russell’s notes that examine one of Wittgenstein’s books on language. Many now argue that since this book includes a presentation of Wittgenstein’s metaphysics of language, and since the notes precede Russell’s own conception of the metaphysics of language, the traditional opinion is obviously false. However, this discovery warrants a more circumspect conclusion. Russell’s notes are restricted to early parts of Wittgenstein’s text, parts that come before the ones in which Wittgenstein launches into his investigation of the metaphysics of language.

In the professor’s reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is evidence that has been used in support of an opposing position.

(B) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is that position.

(C) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is evidence offered to support the professor’s own position.

(D) The first provides evidence supporting an intermediate conclusion drawn to support the overall position defended by the professor; the second provides evidence against that intermediate conclusion.

(E) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is further information that corroborates that evidence.


 


This question was provided by Experts' Global
for the GMAT World Cup 2026

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Admissions Consulting, and more

 


⚠️ Important: GMAT Club does not allow AI-generated posts. AI-generated solutions are not eligible for kudos, and users who post them may face moderation action, including a ban.
Show more

First boldface is evidence used to support other people’s conclusion that the traditional opinion is false (which professor disagrees with). Second boldface is evidence used to support the professor’s own position that the discovery warrants a more circumspect conclusion.

Hence, answer is C.
User avatar
GreenPill
User avatar
Joined: 13 Jun 2026
Last visit: 08 Sep 2026
Posts: 37
Own Kudos:
25
Products:
Forum Quiz
Posts: 37
Kudos: 25
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 4): Professor: Wittgenstein formulated 09 Jul 2026, 10:53
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
Professor: Wittgenstein formulated concepts pertaining to the metaphysics of language, and Russell developed closely analogous concepts on the same subject. The traditional opinion among scholars holds that these two philosophers developed their concepts independently of each other. Historians have, however, uncovered Russell’s notes that examine one of Wittgenstein’s books on language. Many now argue that since this book includes a presentation of Wittgenstein’s metaphysics of language, and since the notes precede Russell’s own conception of the metaphysics of language, the traditional opinion is obviously false. However, this discovery warrants a more circumspect conclusion. Russell’s notes are restricted to early parts of Wittgenstein’s text, parts that come before the ones in which Wittgenstein launches into his investigation of the metaphysics of language.

In the professor’s reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is evidence that has been used in support of an opposing position.

(B) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is that position.

(C) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is evidence offered to support the professor’s own position.

(D) The first provides evidence supporting an intermediate conclusion drawn to support the overall position defended by the professor; the second provides evidence against that intermediate conclusion.

(E) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is further information that corroborates that evidence.


 


This question was provided by Experts' Global
for the GMAT World Cup 2026

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Admissions Consulting, and more

 


⚠️ Important: GMAT Club does not allow AI-generated posts. AI-generated solutions are not eligible for kudos, and users who post them may face moderation action, including a ban.
Show more
OPTION C. the 2nd part is the evidence and first one is criticized. not sure about option D but rest looks wrong.
User avatar
Vivek1707
User avatar
Joined: 22 May 2020
Last visit: 08 Sep 2026
Posts: 357
Own Kudos:
190
 [1]
Given Kudos: 150
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Posts: 357
Kudos: 190
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 4): Professor: Wittgenstein formulated 09 Jul 2026, 10:55
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Argument structure is as follows

Traditional opinion: Two scholars developed their concepts independently.
Counter by historians: the traditional view is false i.e the scholars dint develop opinions independently
Counter to the counter by the author: the discovery warrants a more circumspect conclusion.

BF1 support for the counter by historians
BF2 support for the authors conclusion / stance

(A) 'Defended' is wrong. The two bold faces are not on the same side
(B) 'Defended' is wrong + 2nd portion is a premis not a position.
(C) Correct, counter by the author and premis for the authors support. Perfect match
(D) Again defended is wrong + 2nd is support for the authors conclusion
(E) 2nd is not further info that corroborates an evidence. Its a premis used for the support of the authors position

Bunuel
Professor: Wittgenstein formulated concepts pertaining to the metaphysics of language, and Russell developed closely analogous concepts on the same subject. The traditional opinion among scholars holds that these two philosophers developed their concepts independently of each other. Historians have, however, uncovered Russell’s notes that examine one of Wittgenstein’s books on language. Many now argue that since this book includes a presentation of Wittgenstein’s metaphysics of language, and since the notes precede Russell’s own conception of the metaphysics of language, the traditional opinion is obviously false. However, this discovery warrants a more circumspect conclusion. Russell’s notes are restricted to early parts of Wittgenstein’s text, parts that come before the ones in which Wittgenstein launches into his investigation of the metaphysics of language.

In the professor’s reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is evidence that has been used in support of an opposing position.

(B) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is that position.

(C) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is evidence offered to support the professor’s own position.

(D) The first provides evidence supporting an intermediate conclusion drawn to support the overall position defended by the professor; the second provides evidence against that intermediate conclusion.

(E) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is further information that corroborates that evidence.


 


This question was provided by Experts' Global
for the GMAT World Cup 2026

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Admissions Consulting, and more

 


⚠️ Important: GMAT Club does not allow AI-generated posts. AI-generated solutions are not eligible for kudos, and users who post them may face moderation action, including a ban.
Show more
User avatar
yashsharma1
User avatar
Joined: 18 Apr 2025
Last visit: 08 Sep 2026
Posts: 76
Own Kudos:
49
 [1]
Given Kudos: 26
Location: India
Schools: IESE '26 (WL)
GMAT Focus 1: 645 Q81 V82 DI83
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Schools: IESE '26 (WL)
GMAT Focus 1: 645 Q81 V82 DI83
Posts: 76
Kudos: 49
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 4): Professor: Wittgenstein formulated 09 Jul 2026, 11:25
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
In Boldface questions, my approach is always to read each question and identify the role (fact vs opinion and premise, IC or MC) of the statement in the overall passage. Like this, BF1 (part 2 of sentence number 4) is a fact that has been used by 'many historians' as basis to conclude that the traditional view is false, i.e. 2 philosophers were not independent developers. The author then in sentence number 5 presents Main Conclusion that the discovery warrants more 'circumspect conclusion' which he then supports by some logic or basis in sentence 6 of the passage.

So the role of BF1 is to give a fact that is used in a third party opinion. Author's conclusion is against this opinion
BF2 gives support to the author's main conclusion. Consequently, both the BFs are against each other (not exactly technically but in terms of the directions they are supporting)

A. First provides evidence supporting the overall position DEFENDED BY THE PROFESSOR: Whatever position BF1 is supporting, professor/author is against that and not defending that
B. B is incorrect because of the same reason as A
C. In line with what we concluded. BF1 supports a position which author concludes against. BF2 supports author's own position. CORRECT
D. Wrong on same lines as A & B. Whatever direction the BF1 is supporting, professor/author is not defending that
E. The first is evidence used in support of A CONCLUSION CRITICIZED BY THE PROFESSOR (correct till here), second is further info that CORROBORATES THAT EVIDENCE: here, corroborates that evidence means BF2 is supporting whatever is written in BF1 which is not true and hence this option is incorrect

I have used Professor and author interchangeably but both mean person who wrote the above para
User avatar
SmileAndSolve
User avatar
Joined: 25 Aug 2024
Last visit: 08 Sep 2026
Posts: 81
Own Kudos:
52
 [1]
Given Kudos: 332
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 4
Products:
My Reviews
Posts: 81
Kudos: 52
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 4): Professor: Wittgenstein formulated 09 Jul 2026, 12:06
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
author's view = traditional view might not be wrong
Historians View: Wittgenstein -then-> Russell
A) no, professor opposing the position
B) no, professor opposing that position
C) yes, professor opposing that position, yes it supports author's view that
D) no, author opposing the position
E) yes, no second evidence supports author
Bunuel
Professor: Wittgenstein formulated concepts pertaining to the metaphysics of language, and Russell developed closely analogous concepts on the same subject. The traditional opinion among scholars holds that these two philosophers developed their concepts independently of each other. Historians have, however, uncovered Russell’s notes that examine one of Wittgenstein’s books on language. Many now argue that since this book includes a presentation of Wittgenstein’s metaphysics of language, and since the notes precede Russell’s own conception of the metaphysics of language, the traditional opinion is obviously false. However, this discovery warrants a more circumspect conclusion. Russell’s notes are restricted to early parts of Wittgenstein’s text, parts that come before the ones in which Wittgenstein launches into his investigation of the metaphysics of language.

In the professor’s reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is evidence that has been used in support of an opposing position.

(B) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is that position.

(C) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is evidence offered to support the professor’s own position.

(D) The first provides evidence supporting an intermediate conclusion drawn to support the overall position defended by the professor; the second provides evidence against that intermediate conclusion.

(E) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is further information that corroborates that evidence.


 


This question was provided by Experts' Global
for the GMAT World Cup 2026

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Admissions Consulting, and more

 


⚠️ Important: GMAT Club does not allow AI-generated posts. AI-generated solutions are not eligible for kudos, and users who post them may face moderation action, including a ban.
Show more
User avatar
ShreyaMittal1609
User avatar
Joined: 05 Nov 2025
Last visit: 08 Sep 2026
Posts: 82
Own Kudos:
45
 [1]
Given Kudos: 210
GMAT Focus 1: 545 Q77 V77 DI77
Products:
My Reviews GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
GMAT Focus 1: 545 Q77 V77 DI77
Posts: 82
Kudos: 45
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 4): Professor: Wittgenstein formulated 09 Jul 2026, 12:17
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
My answer is C.)

GIST of the argument-
Scholars claim that traditional opinion that the 2 Philosophers developed the concepts independently is FALSE (Reason/Evidence- "the notes precede Russell's own....")
Author/Professor- Criticized the scholars claim and warrants a more circumspect conclusion (Reason/Evidence)- "Russell's notes are restricted to....")

As we can see-
BF1- Reason/evidence given by scholars to support their claim; BF-2- Reason/Evidence given by author to support his conclusion.


A) BF1 is not supporting the overall position defended by author- Eliminate
B) Same as above- Eliminate
C) Matches our Pre-thinking- CORRECT
D) Claim is not supporting the overall position taken by author- Eliminate
E) First part is correct. Second BF is not just further info that is corroborating but it is offered as evidence by author.- Eliminate.
Bunuel
Professor: Wittgenstein formulated concepts pertaining to the metaphysics of language, and Russell developed closely analogous concepts on the same subject. The traditional opinion among scholars holds that these two philosophers developed their concepts independently of each other. Historians have, however, uncovered Russell’s notes that examine one of Wittgenstein’s books on language. Many now argue that since this book includes a presentation of Wittgenstein’s metaphysics of language, and since the notes precede Russell’s own conception of the metaphysics of language, the traditional opinion is obviously false. However, this discovery warrants a more circumspect conclusion. Russell’s notes are restricted to early parts of Wittgenstein’s text, parts that come before the ones in which Wittgenstein launches into his investigation of the metaphysics of language.

In the professor’s reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is evidence that has been used in support of an opposing position.

(B) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is that position.

(C) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is evidence offered to support the professor’s own position.

(D) The first provides evidence supporting an intermediate conclusion drawn to support the overall position defended by the professor; the second provides evidence against that intermediate conclusion.

(E) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is further information that corroborates that evidence.


 


This question was provided by Experts' Global
for the GMAT World Cup 2026

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Admissions Consulting, and more

 


⚠️ Important: GMAT Club does not allow AI-generated posts. AI-generated solutions are not eligible for kudos, and users who post them may face moderation action, including a ban.
Show more
User avatar
okHedwig
User avatar
Joined: 13 Apr 2022
Last visit: 01 Sep 2026
Posts: 106
Own Kudos:
66
Given Kudos: 70
Posts: 106
Kudos: 66
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 4): Professor: Wittgenstein formulated 09 Jul 2026, 12:21
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
IMO D
Professor makes an intermediate conclusion that "traditional opinion is obviously false" Boldface1 supports evidence for this. Whereas for his final conclusion "However, this discovery warrants a more circumspect conclusion", Boldface 2 gives evidence

A= B1 is not evidence to support the overall position - false
B= second is not that position
C=B1 is used to support evidence defended by prof not criticized
D= perfectly matches
E=B1 not used to support conclusion criticized by prof same as C
Bunuel
Professor: Wittgenstein formulated concepts pertaining to the metaphysics of language, and Russell developed closely analogous concepts on the same subject. The traditional opinion among scholars holds that these two philosophers developed their concepts independently of each other. Historians have, however, uncovered Russell’s notes that examine one of Wittgenstein’s books on language. Many now argue that since this book includes a presentation of Wittgenstein’s metaphysics of language, and since the notes precede Russell’s own conception of the metaphysics of language, the traditional opinion is obviously false. However, this discovery warrants a more circumspect conclusion. Russell’s notes are restricted to early parts of Wittgenstein’s text, parts that come before the ones in which Wittgenstein launches into his investigation of the metaphysics of language.

In the professor’s reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is evidence that has been used in support of an opposing position.

(B) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is that position.

(C) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is evidence offered to support the professor’s own position.

(D) The first provides evidence supporting an intermediate conclusion drawn to support the overall position defended by the professor; the second provides evidence against that intermediate conclusion.

(E) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is further information that corroborates that evidence.


 


This question was provided by Experts' Global
for the GMAT World Cup 2026

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Admissions Consulting, and more

 


⚠️ Important: GMAT Club does not allow AI-generated posts. AI-generated solutions are not eligible for kudos, and users who post them may face moderation action, including a ban.
Show more
User avatar
PJ8
User avatar
Joined: 08 Jun 2026
Last visit: 30 Jul 2026
Posts: 21
Own Kudos:
13
Given Kudos: 6
Posts: 21
Kudos: 13
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 4): Professor: Wittgenstein formulated 09 Jul 2026, 12:32
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Option C since the First one supports the conclusion, which shows traditional opinion is false also but second one is support for professor own's position of more circumspect conclusion.



 


This question was provided by Experts' Global
for the GMAT World Cup 2026

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Admissions Consulting, and more

 


⚠️ Important: GMAT Club does not allow AI-generated posts. AI-generated solutions are not eligible for kudos, and users who post them may face moderation action, including a ban.
User avatar
Rishm
User avatar
Joined: 05 May 2024
Last visit: 08 Sep 2026
Posts: 370
Own Kudos:
78
 [1]
Given Kudos: 82
Location: India
Schools: Johnson '27 LBS '27 IESE '27
GPA: 10
WE:Consulting (Consulting)
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Schools: Johnson '27 LBS '27 IESE '27
Posts: 370
Kudos: 78
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 4): Professor: Wittgenstein formulated 09 Jul 2026, 12:49
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A--- The professor does not defends the position, disregard.
B---The second is not that position - remove
C---CORRECT - First is evidence to support the conclusion and second is evidence to support the own professor position.
D---IRRELEVANT
E--- Close, but this says the second corroborates that evidence, note it corroborates the conclusion. Hence No.
User avatar
Shlok02
User avatar
Joined: 08 Jan 2024
Last visit: 08 Sep 2026
Posts: 65
Own Kudos:
41
Given Kudos: 6
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Posts: 65
Kudos: 41
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 4): Professor: Wittgenstein formulated 09 Jul 2026, 12:56
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
Professor: Wittgenstein formulated concepts pertaining to the metaphysics of language, and Russell developed closely analogous concepts on the same subject. The traditional opinion among scholars holds that these two philosophers developed their concepts independently of each other. Historians have, however, uncovered Russell’s notes that examine one of Wittgenstein’s books on language. Many now argue that since this book includes a presentation of Wittgenstein’s metaphysics of language, and since the notes precede Russell’s own conception of the metaphysics of language, the traditional opinion is obviously false. However, this discovery warrants a more circumspect conclusion. Russell’s notes are restricted to early parts of Wittgenstein’s text, parts that come before the ones in which Wittgenstein launches into his investigation of the metaphysics of language.

In the professor’s reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is evidence that has been used in support of an opposing position.

(B) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is that position.

(C) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is evidence offered to support the professor’s own position.

(D) The first provides evidence supporting an intermediate conclusion drawn to support the overall position defended by the professor; the second provides evidence against that intermediate conclusion.

(E) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is further information that corroborates that evidence.


 


This question was provided by Experts' Global
for the GMAT World Cup 2026

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Admissions Consulting, and more

 


⚠️ Important: GMAT Club does not allow AI-generated posts. AI-generated solutions are not eligible for kudos, and users who post them may face moderation action, including a ban.
Show more
Statememt 1 servers as an evidence supporting the conclusion that the traditional opinion - of Wittgentstein and Russel developing their concepts independently is FALSE
The professor refutes this opinion based on his own evidences which is the 2nd boldface statement. As such:

A - EXCLUDE
B - EXCLUDE
C- Keep
D- EXCLUDE
E - EXCLUDE

Answer - C
User avatar
sonit1987
User avatar
Joined: 29 Jul 2025
Last visit: 07 Sep 2026
Posts: 61
Own Kudos:
51
Location: India
Concentration: Operations, Sustainability
WE:Operations (Energy)
Posts: 61
Kudos: 51
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 4): Professor: Wittgenstein formulated 09 Jul 2026, 13:00
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I can't explain this.. I myself could solve this.. i hope it may be correct.

My deductions are based on... first boldface professor is trying to negate general people opinion by saying one writer used others work.

But he also cautioned in the second boldface that it may also be incorrect and general people may be right. It is very obvious that from 2nd bold face he is supporting his own caution through right evidence. and first is evidence he gave to criticize general notion that both work are independent and professor trying to oppose that with first boldface evidence that no one's work is dependent on other. and hence answer is C
User avatar
mehtyas
User avatar
Joined: 27 May 2025
Last visit: 08 Sep 2026
Posts: 74
Own Kudos:
61
 [1]
Given Kudos: 844
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Posts: 74
Kudos: 61
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 4): Professor: Wittgenstein formulated 09 Jul 2026, 15:30
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
1st Boldface - Evidence used by the historians to support their conclusion (the conclusion that the professor criticises)
2nd Boldface - Evidence supporting the professor's position(the historians' conclusion is premature)

Option C correctly captures that - The first supports a conclusion the professor questions, while the 2nd supports the professor's reasoning.

A - The 1st BF supports the historian's argument, not professors.
B - Same issue as Option A - the 1st BF is evidence for the opposing view.
D - The 1st BF is evidence, not an intermediate conclusion in the professor's argument.
E - The 2nd BF does not strengthen the 1st - it explains why the 1st is not enough to prove the historian's claim.
User avatar
Amity007
User avatar
Joined: 12 Sep 2025
Last visit: 08 Sep 2026
Posts: 266
Own Kudos:
493
 [1]
Given Kudos: 1,870
Location: India
Schools: ISB
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Schools: ISB
Posts: 266
Kudos: 493
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 4): Professor: Wittgenstein formulated 09 Jul 2026, 15:47
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Main conclusion: However, this discovery warrants a more circumspect conclusion. This seems like authors/professors main conclusion.
Professor intermediate conclusion just before main conclusion is: the traditional opinion is obviously false.

So as we read the passage we can say first bold face is helping to make the professors conclusion. And second is more of justifying the authors conclusion after author/professor presented his main conclusion. so we need to find the similar option.

A) This option we can Eliminate by seeing first supporting the position which was defended by author/professor, he's not defending rather asking to reconsider in it's main conclusion. Second statement is right.
B) In this both statement is wrong, in first it's saying defended by professor. in the second, it's calling that position. both wrong. Eliminate.
C) This seems correct. First is supporting something which is criticized by professor. and second supporting the professors/authors conclusion which happens to be main conclusion. Both correct. Keep.
D) In this also, it says the supported conclusion is defended by author. so Eliminate.
E) This is a confusing one, as first statement is definitely right, but if we notice second is not actually collaborating with the first one, rather giving proof against it. So Eliminate this too.

Our Answer should be C
Bunuel
Professor: Wittgenstein formulated concepts pertaining to the metaphysics of language, and Russell developed closely analogous concepts on the same subject. The traditional opinion among scholars holds that these two philosophers developed their concepts independently of each other. Historians have, however, uncovered Russell’s notes that examine one of Wittgenstein’s books on language. Many now argue that since this book includes a presentation of Wittgenstein’s metaphysics of language, and since the notes precede Russell’s own conception of the metaphysics of language, the traditional opinion is obviously false. However, this discovery warrants a more circumspect conclusion. Russell’s notes are restricted to early parts of Wittgenstein’s text, parts that come before the ones in which Wittgenstein launches into his investigation of the metaphysics of language.

In the professor’s reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is evidence that has been used in support of an opposing position.

(B) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is that position.

(C) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is evidence offered to support the professor’s own position.

(D) The first provides evidence supporting an intermediate conclusion drawn to support the overall position defended by the professor; the second provides evidence against that intermediate conclusion.

(E) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is further information that corroborates that evidence.


 


This question was provided by Experts' Global
for the GMAT World Cup 2026

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Admissions Consulting, and more

 


⚠️ Important: GMAT Club does not allow AI-generated posts. AI-generated solutions are not eligible for kudos, and users who post them may face moderation action, including a ban.
Show more
User avatar
alamin8
User avatar
Joined: 24 May 2025
Last visit: 07 Sep 2026
Posts: 183
Own Kudos:
79
 [1]
Given Kudos: 32
Location: Bangladesh
Concentration: Accounting, Technology
Schools: HEC Sept '27 INSEAD Aug '27 UNC '27
GPA: 3.89
Schools: HEC Sept '27 INSEAD Aug '27 UNC '27
Posts: 183
Kudos: 79
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 4): Professor: Wittgenstein formulated 09 Jul 2026, 17:51
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The answer is C

(A) The first boldface does not support the professor's standpoint, as he said it required more circumspect conclusion. Eliminate.
(B) The professor did not defend the evidence, and the second is evidence, not its position. Eliminate.
(C) The professor did actually criticize the conclusion in the first boldface, the second is evidence to support the professor's position. Answer
(D) It is not an intermediate conclusion, eliminate.
(E) The first part is ok, but the second boldface is not corroborating the first one, eliminate.
User avatar
danielasolis
User avatar
Joined: 28 Apr 2026
Last visit: 11 Aug 2026
Posts: 18
Own Kudos:
10
Given Kudos: 10
Posts: 18
Kudos: 10
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 4): Professor: Wittgenstein formulated 09 Jul 2026, 20:21
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Both boldface sentences are supporting Professor's conclusion, CORRECT ANSWER: C

Bunuel
Professor: Wittgenstein formulated concepts pertaining to the metaphysics of language, and Russell developed closely analogous concepts on the same subject. The traditional opinion among scholars holds that these two philosophers developed their concepts independently of each other. Historians have, however, uncovered Russell’s notes that examine one of Wittgenstein’s books on language. Many now argue that since this book includes a presentation of Wittgenstein’s metaphysics of language, and since the notes precede Russell’s own conception of the metaphysics of language, the traditional opinion is obviously false. However, this discovery warrants a more circumspect conclusion. Russell’s notes are restricted to early parts of Wittgenstein’s text, parts that come before the ones in which Wittgenstein launches into his investigation of the metaphysics of language.

In the professor’s reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is evidence that has been used in support of an opposing position.

(B) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is that position.

(C) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is evidence offered to support the professor’s own position.

(D) The first provides evidence supporting an intermediate conclusion drawn to support the overall position defended by the professor; the second provides evidence against that intermediate conclusion.

(E) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is further information that corroborates that evidence.


 


This question was provided by Experts' Global
for the GMAT World Cup 2026

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Admissions Consulting, and more

 


⚠️ Important: GMAT Club does not allow AI-generated posts. AI-generated solutions are not eligible for kudos, and users who post them may face moderation action, including a ban.
Show more
User avatar
GamePine
User avatar
Joined: 31 May 2026
Last visit: 04 Aug 2026
Posts: 61
Own Kudos:
55
Given Kudos: 1
GMAT Focus 1: 645 Q79 V85 DI82
GMAT Focus 1: 645 Q79 V85 DI82
Posts: 61
Kudos: 55
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 4): Professor: Wittgenstein formulated 09 Jul 2026, 20:26
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The answer is C. Many people support the conclusion that Russell and Wittgenstein's work are not independent as previously though because there is evidence that Russell had notes on Wittgenstein's work that predated his. The evidence is the first bold statement and later the professor criticizes this conclusion and supports that criticism with the evidence in the second bold statement that Russell's notes were restricted to early parts of the text before Wittgenstein's metaphysics investigation.
User avatar
rungtamehul
User avatar
Joined: 03 Aug 2025
Last visit: 15 Aug 2026
Posts: 26
Own Kudos:
20
 [1]
Given Kudos: 195
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Schools: ISB HEC Sept '27 INSEAD Aug '27
GMAT Focus 1: 705 Q88 V85 DI82
GPA: 7.8
Schools: ISB HEC Sept '27 INSEAD Aug '27
GMAT Focus 1: 705 Q88 V85 DI82
Posts: 26
Kudos: 20
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 4): Professor: Wittgenstein formulated 09 Jul 2026, 21:22
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Lets first identify the author's conclusion, It is: "This discovery warrants a more circumspect conclusion". It means that the author is saying that we need to look at the evidence more carefully before coming up with a conclusion. Why does the author say so? its because of the line that follows the conclusion (The BF statement 2)

Now lets categorise each boldface statement into Premise or Conclusion
BF1 is a premise used to support a conclusion which says that the traditional view is false
BF2 is a premise used to support author's conclusion

Now lets eliminate the options
Option A: The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the author. Wrong, It is to support a conclusion which the author challenges. Eliminate
Option B: Same error as Option A, the first part of the statement is incorrect. Eliminate
Option C: This sits well with the argument. But lets eliminate other options to be sure. Keep
Option D: The first statement is incorrect as there is no intermediate conclusion which supports the overall conclusion. Eliminate
Option E: This is a trap. Keep in mind, in GMAT, you can NEVER "Corroborate/Support/Refute an evidence". An evidence is a fact, it cannot be supported or refuted. Eliminate

Therefore by elimination, you get option C as the correct answer
Bunuel
Professor: Wittgenstein formulated concepts pertaining to the metaphysics of language, and Russell developed closely analogous concepts on the same subject. The traditional opinion among scholars holds that these two philosophers developed their concepts independently of each other. Historians have, however, uncovered Russell’s notes that examine one of Wittgenstein’s books on language. Many now argue that since this book includes a presentation of Wittgenstein’s metaphysics of language, and since the notes precede Russell’s own conception of the metaphysics of language, the traditional opinion is obviously false. However, this discovery warrants a more circumspect conclusion. Russell’s notes are restricted to early parts of Wittgenstein’s text, parts that come before the ones in which Wittgenstein launches into his investigation of the metaphysics of language.

In the professor’s reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is evidence that has been used in support of an opposing position.

(B) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is that position.

(C) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is evidence offered to support the professor’s own position.

(D) The first provides evidence supporting an intermediate conclusion drawn to support the overall position defended by the professor; the second provides evidence against that intermediate conclusion.

(E) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is further information that corroborates that evidence.


 


This question was provided by Experts' Global
for the GMAT World Cup 2026

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Admissions Consulting, and more

 


⚠️ Important: GMAT Club does not allow AI-generated posts. AI-generated solutions are not eligible for kudos, and users who post them may face moderation action, including a ban.
Show more
User avatar
rockstar09rulez
User avatar
Joined: 30 Sep 2023
Last visit: 06 Sep 2026
Posts: 43
Own Kudos:
25
 [1]
Given Kudos: 74
Location: United States (CA)
Concentration: Technology, Finance
Products:
GMAT Club Tests
Posts: 43
Kudos: 25
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 4): Professor: Wittgenstein formulated 09 Jul 2026, 21:26
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
pre thinking
BF1: is supporting someone else's ('many now argue') conclusion and the author doesn't agree with this conclusion
BF2: is supporting author's position that 'discovery warrants a more circumspect conclusion'

A) author is not defending the position following BF1 - ELIMINATE
B) BF1 doesn't support author's position - ELIMINATE
C) matches prethinking - ANS)
D) BF1 has nothing to do with supporting author's position - ELIMINATE
E) BF2 is not supporting the evidence in BF2 - ELIMINATE
User avatar
vasu1104
User avatar
Joined: 10 Feb 2023
Last visit: 08 Sep 2026
Posts: 733
Own Kudos:
422
 [1]
Given Kudos: 672
Location: Canada
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Posts: 733
Kudos: 422
 [1]
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 4): Professor: Wittgenstein formulated 09 Jul 2026, 22:51
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
BF 1 = the notes precede russells own conception of metaphysics of language.
BF 2= russells notes are restricted to early parts of wittgenstein's text, aprts that come before the ones in which wittgentein launches into his investigation of metaphysics of language.

so passage talks about two people developed a concept on same subject. some scholar believe that they developed this independetly of each other. but then some people argue on that russells notes examine one of W's books on language. these people are also saying that russells notes preceds his own conception of metaphysics of language. hence the traditional opinion is false. this is not prefessor/authors conclusion. this is certain section of peoples conclusion.

then professor made his conclusion saying that discovery warrants more circumspect conclusion. and then he gave reason why he/she feels so.


A first is not evidence that supports professors position. reject.
B agains same as above first is not in support of professors position. out.
C yes. first is indeed the evidence that supported certain section of people that professor discarded. second is indeed reasoning/ evidence to back his/her own conclusion. keep.
D half part of first sentence is correct but this intermediate conclusion doestn support the professors position. but rathe its in opposite direction.
E second is not providing any further evidence that supports the evidence used in drawing intermediate conclusion. out.

choice C

Bunuel
Professor: Wittgenstein formulated concepts pertaining to the metaphysics of language, and Russell developed closely analogous concepts on the same subject. The traditional opinion among scholars holds that these two philosophers developed their concepts independently of each other. Historians have, however, uncovered Russell’s notes that examine one of Wittgenstein’s books on language. Many now argue that since this book includes a presentation of Wittgenstein’s metaphysics of language, and since the notes precede Russell’s own conception of the metaphysics of language, the traditional opinion is obviously false. However, this discovery warrants a more circumspect conclusion. Russell’s notes are restricted to early parts of Wittgenstein’s text, parts that come before the ones in which Wittgenstein launches into his investigation of the metaphysics of language.

In the professor’s reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is evidence that has been used in support of an opposing position.

(B) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is that position.

(C) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is evidence offered to support the professor’s own position.

(D) The first provides evidence supporting an intermediate conclusion drawn to support the overall position defended by the professor; the second provides evidence against that intermediate conclusion.

(E) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is further information that corroborates that evidence.


 


This question was provided by Experts' Global
for the GMAT World Cup 2026

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Admissions Consulting, and more

 


⚠️ Important: GMAT Club does not allow AI-generated posts. AI-generated solutions are not eligible for kudos, and users who post them may face moderation action, including a ban.
Show more
User avatar
Punt
User avatar
Joined: 09 Jul 2024
Last visit: 10 Aug 2026
Posts: 96
Own Kudos:
77
Given Kudos: 18
Location: India
Posts: 96
Kudos: 77
GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 4): Professor: Wittgenstein formulated 09 Jul 2026, 23:11
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Structure of the arguement:

    • Traditional Opinion among scholars: Wittegenstein & Russell developed their concepts independently.
    • Some historians argue that the traditional view is false.
    • Historians resoning/evidence: Russel had notes on Wittgenstein's book & the notes predate Russell's own work (First boldface).
    • The professor reject the conclusion & offer other one (cautius one).
    • The reason : the notes cover only the early parts of Wittgenstein's book, before the metaphysics discussion begins (second boldface).


Option "C" is in line with above.
where it says:
  • The first boldface is evidence used in support of the conclusion that professor criticizes.
  • The second boldface is the evidence supporting the professor's own position.

Answer : C

Bunuel
Professor: Wittgenstein formulated concepts pertaining to the metaphysics of language, and Russell developed closely analogous concepts on the same subject. The traditional opinion among scholars holds that these two philosophers developed their concepts independently of each other. Historians have, however, uncovered Russell’s notes that examine one of Wittgenstein’s books on language. Many now argue that since this book includes a presentation of Wittgenstein’s metaphysics of language, and since the notes precede Russell’s own conception of the metaphysics of language, the traditional opinion is obviously false. However, this discovery warrants a more circumspect conclusion. Russell’s notes are restricted to early parts of Wittgenstein’s text, parts that come before the ones in which Wittgenstein launches into his investigation of the metaphysics of language.

In the professor’s reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is evidence that has been used in support of an opposing position.

(B) The first provides evidence supporting the overall position defended by the professor; the second is that position.

(C) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is evidence offered to support the professor’s own position.

(D) The first provides evidence supporting an intermediate conclusion drawn to support the overall position defended by the professor; the second provides evidence against that intermediate conclusion.

(E) The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor; the second is further information that corroborates that evidence.


 


This question was provided by Experts' Global
for the GMAT World Cup 2026

Win over $30,000 in prizes such as Courses, Admissions Consulting, and more

 


⚠️ Important: GMAT Club does not allow AI-generated posts. AI-generated solutions are not eligible for kudos, and users who post them may face moderation action, including a ban.
Show more
   1   2   3   4   5   
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7399 posts
AbhishekP220108
Verbal Forum Moderator
705 posts