Last visit was: 08 Sep 2026, 13:08

It is currently 08 Sep 2026, 13:08

Toolkit

Practice Tests

Critical Reasoning (CR)

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

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Sep 09
Masters' Spotlight Fair
07:00 AM PDT
-
10:00 AM PDT
Meet AdComs and explore top Master’s programs - MiM, MiF, MSc, MSBA and more. - Application Fee Waivers - Free 1-Week of GMAT Club Tests: - Master's Application Toolkit - Grand Prize Giveaway
Sep 09
How Aman Bounced Back from 3 MBA Rejections to Get Into Cambridge
10:00 AM PDT
-
11:00 AM PDT
Three MBA applications. Three rejections. No interview invites. A year later, Aman was admitted to Cambridge Judge, SMU, and IMD. In this episode of MBA Admit Stories, Aman shares how he rebuilt his MBA application...
Sep 04
BIG NEWS! We’ve been nominated, and we’d love your vote!
10:00 AM EDT
-
11:59 PM EDT
We’ve worked incredibly hard to build TTP into the best test prep experience possible, and it would mean a lot to us to win Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep. If TTP has helped you, we’d be incredibly grateful for your vote.

Back to Forum

Create Topic

GMAT Club World Cup 2026 (Day 4): Professor: Wittgenstein formulated

1 2 3 4 5

jkkamau

Joined: 25 May 2020

Last visit: 08 Sep 2026

Posts: 285

Own Kudos:

244

Given Kudos: 148

Location: Kenya

Schools: Jones '26 (A$$)

GMAT 1: 730 Q50 V46 Verified score

GPA: 3.5

Products:

Schools: Jones '26 (A$$)

GMAT 1: 730 Q50 V46 Verified score

Posts: 285

Kudos: 244

10 Jul 2026, 05:15

Kudos

Bookmarks

Looking at the two boldface statements we can conclude that:
Boldface 1 is evidence that supports a general conclusion that the professor is not in agreement with
Boldface 2 is the evidence that aligns with the professor own conclusion which calls into question the historians conclusion
From the choices given only C perfectly aligns with the above observation
Ans 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.

chan992

Joined: 21 May 2020

Last visit: 19 Jul 2026

Posts: 13

Own Kudos:

Posts: 13

Kudos: 10

10 Jul 2026, 05:36

Kudos

Bookmarks

ANS : C.

FIRST PART : HISTORIANS
SECOND PART : THE WRITER

JollyScale

Joined: 04 Jul 2026

Last visit: 28 Aug 2026

Posts: 55

Own Kudos:

Location: India

Schools: HBS '27 CBS '27 Stanford '27

GPA: 6.87/7

WE:Marketing (Finance: Diversified Financial Services)

Products:

Schools: HBS '27 CBS '27 Stanford '27

Posts: 55

Kudos: 49

10 Jul 2026, 05:46

Kudos

Bookmarks

1st is playing role of evidence used in supporting the conclusion the prof is questioning

2nd is professors evidence
C is the ans

Bunuel

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.

firefox300

Joined: 15 Dec 2025

Last visit: 27 Jul 2026

Posts: 151

Own Kudos:

140

[1]

Posts: 151

Kudos: 140

[1]

10 Jul 2026, 05:49

Kudos

Bookmarks

A First bold doesn't support professor's opinion.

B First bold doesn't support professor's opinion.

C CORRECT. First bold is evidence for an argument the professor rejects and second bold is evidence for the professor's own argument.

D First bold directly supports a conclusion the professor challenges.

E Second bold undermines first bold.

The correct answer is C

Nsanghavi

Joined: 08 Jul 2025

Last visit: 29 Aug 2026

Posts: 59

Own Kudos:

[1]

Given Kudos: 20

Products:

Posts: 59

Kudos: 46

[1]

10 Jul 2026, 06:07

Kudos

Bookmarks

Let's understand the question first,
Professor's conclusion is that he disagrees with those who say the traditional opinion is false. According to gim, the evidence is not strong enough to conclude that Russel took his idea from Wittgenstein.
The first bold part - mentions the opinion which professor does not agree with
The second bold part - mentions the opinion which the professor agree with

Option A - It is altogether opposite of what is there in question - Hence it is false
Option B - Again it mentions that the first provide evidence supporting professor - so this is false
Option C - This is correct but let's see other options as well
Option D - Again this mentions that the first part provides evidence as per professor - so this is wrong
Option E - Over here the first part is correct but the second part is not a further information - rather it is evidence offered to support the professor's position. - hence this is also wrong

Correct is Option C

Parry104

Joined: 30 Oct 2025

Last visit: 07 Sep 2026

Posts: 28

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 3

Location: India

Concentration: Technology, Operations

Schools: ISB '27 IIM NUS '27

GRE 1: Q170 V158 Verified score

GPA: 3.14

Products:

Schools: ISB '27 IIM NUS '27

GRE 1: Q170 V158 Verified score

Posts: 28

Kudos: 26

10 Jul 2026, 06:13

Kudos

Bookmarks

The passage has 2 conclusions. First being Russel's work might have been derived from Wittgenstein and is being criticized for that. The second being this criticism needs more evidence.

The first bold sentence supports the criticism, while the second statement offers support to Russel.

Answer C

redandme21

Joined: 14 Dec 2025

Last visit: 01 Aug 2026

Posts: 157

Own Kudos:

144

[1]

Posts: 157

Kudos: 144

[1]

10 Jul 2026, 06:17

Kudos

Bookmarks

The professor's position is that we must be cautious about concluding Russell copied Wittgenstein because Russell's notes only cover parts of the book written before Wittgenstein even discussed metaphysics.

A The first doesn't support the overall position defended by the professor. It supports the "many historian's position".

B The first doesn't support the overall position defended by the professor. It supports the "many historian's position".

C Correct. First bold is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by the professor. Second bold is evidence supporting the professor's own position.

D The first doesn't support an intermediate conclusion drawn to support the overall position defended by the professor. It supports the "many historian's position".

E The second supports the overall position defended by the professor.

IMO C

kavyamahajan9

Joined: 09 Jun 2021

Last visit: 16 Aug 2026

Posts: 44

Own Kudos:

[1]

Given Kudos: 1

Posts: 44

Kudos: 40

[1]

10 Jul 2026, 06:21

Kudos

Bookmarks

Option C - The first is evidence used in support of a conclusion criticized by professor , the second is evidence offered ...

So the first bold face tells us that the russell may have studied some parts of wittgensein notes but this cannot be the only evidence as in the next bold face it is clearly stated that the notes are till some early parts of the text that is what the professor is supporting or suggesting that both individuals have their own conclusions

why not the others
A) Second is not evidence offered to support of an opposing position but rather professors own thoughts
B) first text does not support the professor and the second text is not a position but an actual finding
D) First is not the statement defended by professor as professor does not draw any support for that
E) The first text does not agree with the second one so this is def wrong

Bunuel

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.

K812

Joined: 24 Jun 2020

Last visit: 08 Sep 2026

Posts: 45

Own Kudos:

[1]

Given Kudos: 5

Products:

Posts: 45

Kudos: 36

[1]

10 Jul 2026, 06:32

Kudos

Bookmarks

In bold face questions, as we read the question stem, its important to understand what each statement is doing while understanding the entire argument.

Here is some pre-thinking I did for the roles played by BF statements:

After reading the entire question stem, I quickly break down the structure- Two people developed some similar concepts. Traditional opinion is offered that the developers developed these concepts independently (without referring to each other's work). Then, historians's views are presented by the professor and evidence is offered that supports historians' view.

The first BF statement does exactly this. It provides evidence/information that supports the conclusion/view of historians.

Then, the statement comes "However, the discovery warrants..."- this is professor's own view/conclusion. And then the second BF statement offers evidence that supports his own view as to why this discovery of Russel's notes needs more understanding.

Now, once we are sure we understand this structure, moving on to answer choices:

A. the first part itself is incorrect, I wouldn't even read further- The first BF statement is evidence that supports the historians' conclusion and the professor's conclusion is actually against the ones offered by the historians. So it can not support professor's conclusion

B. Again, incorrect for the same reason as above

C. Correct- exactly matches with the prethinking

D. the first part itself is incorrect - There is no intermediate conclusion. There is historians' view and evidence to support it and counter argument of professor and evidence to support his position

E. The second part is incorrect (first is correct)- Second BF statement does not support the evidence offered by the first BF statement. It is actually counter evidence to it.

snorlax02

Joined: 22 Dec 2025

Last visit: 30 Jul 2026

Posts: 39

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 4

Posts: 39

Kudos: 24

10 Jul 2026, 06:43

Kudos

Bookmarks

W's & R's concept on MP of Lang are compared
Context - Traditional opinion -> independently discoveries
Intermediate conclusion -> That R's work came from W's books supported by a statement that R's notes has W thus traditional opinion is wrong
Prof supprts - traditional opinion.

A - No because first doesn't support prof claim

B - No the evidence doesn't supports claim backed by prof

C - Prof is not trying to criticise the other opinion but he is accepting it and using it to support his claims

D (because there is a claim that tradn opinions are false and there is an evidence to support it but we are using the evidence to turn the flow against its own conclusion by providing more facts)

E - Second doesn't corroborates the first evidence

Ans - D

Like People are arguing that the pinions of R & W are not independent because R studied W's books and that led him to same conclusion but using the same fact and adding more info we are backing our position nullifying their claims by accepting them but turning it against them.

Bunuel

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.

rajdeep212003

Joined: 11 Dec 2024

Last visit: 08 Sep 2026

Posts: 156

Own Kudos:

[1]

Given Kudos: 17

Location: India

Schools: ISB '27 Kellogg INSEAD MiM '26

Products:

Schools: ISB '27 Kellogg INSEAD MiM '26

Posts: 156

Kudos: 78

[1]

10 Jul 2026, 06:45

Kudos

Bookmarks

I got option C as an answer .
--- After reading the passage and two bold faces My thought process over two bold faces is
BF1 -- And this is the view that opposing side uses to claim traditional view is false . And also the professor is criticizing the conclusion
BF2 -- This is Professor's own counter argument supporting his more cautious position
---- option a -- Wrong ,, Bold phase one supported the opposing side ,, Next option B Hmm same as option A ,, Option D -- Here bold phase two is wrong It is Professor's own evidence Not anything against ,, And For option e -- It's kind of boldface The second one contradicts with the first one
--- And for option c it perfectly matches with my pre thoughts so here is the ans
--- If anyone has any better reasoning or any better way to solve it feel free to tag : )

harishj1996

Joined: 01 Jun 2026

Last visit: 01 Aug 2026

Posts: 38

Own Kudos:

[1]

Given Kudos: 5

Products:

Posts: 38

Kudos: 28

[1]

10 Jul 2026, 06:51

Kudos

Bookmarks

In this answer choice, it falls between C and D.

In the first boldface - what is stated - is used to support the argument against the traditional notion in that those notes and the fact that Wittgenstein preceded Russell in the development of the philosophy means that Russell derived his own theory after studying Wittgenstein rather than independently. So this gives an evidence used against the position that the traditional notion is false.

This position above is criticized by the Professor - Why? - Because he later says this view is more circumspect.

Thereafter the second boldface provides that Russell's notes on Wittgenstein are actually unrelated to the theory of development of language and are on some other topics preceding the same. Therefore, he uses the second boldface to reinforce his own theory.

Why (D) cannot be the answer ? - There is no such intermediate conclusion which is drawn. An intermediate conclusion would prove something part way which would then be used to arrive at the final conclusion. However, this question deals with two opposite ideas and the Professor using the second statement to counteract the first. Hence (C) is the answer.

AthaniX

Joined: 21 Jun 2026

Last visit: 06 Sep 2026

Posts: 33

Own Kudos:

[1]

Given Kudos: 2

Products:

Posts: 33

Kudos: 27

[1]

10 Jul 2026, 06:54

Kudos

Bookmarks

First BF is used by opposing side to argue the R was influenced by W.
Second BF is the prof's own evidence explaining why the new discovery doesnt prove the influence.

A. BF1 supports the opposing argument, not the prof
B. Both points wrong, BF1. is opponent's evidence, BF2 is the evidence, not conclusion
C. Exactly right!, First is opponents evidence, second is prof's rebuttal evidence
D. BF1 is never used by the prof to support his own argument
E. Only 1st half is corrcet, but BF2 does not strengthern BF1

Bunuel

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.

canopyinthecity

Joined: 12 Jul 2025

Last visit: 08 Sep 2026

Posts: 162

Own Kudos:

106

[1]

Given Kudos: 26

Products:

Posts: 162

Kudos: 106

[1]

10 Jul 2026, 06:56

Kudos

Bookmarks

(A) This is incorrect as the first evidence supports traditional opinion is false, which is not the overall position defended by the professor

(B) Same reason as A - hence incorrect

(C) Boths parts are correct - hence this is correct

(D) This is incorrect as - traditional opinion is false is not an intermediary conclusion

(E) First part is correct but second does not support first - hence incorrect

prepapr

Joined: 06 Jan 2025

Last visit: 08 Sep 2026

Posts: 165

Own Kudos:

121

[1]

Given Kudos: 71

Location: India

Schools: INSEAD Aug '27 IIM IIM ISB '27 NUS '27

GMAT Focus 1: 675 Q84 V84 DI82 Verified score

GPA: 8.9

Products:

Schools: INSEAD Aug '27 IIM IIM ISB '27 NUS '27

GMAT Focus 1: 675 Q84 V84 DI82 Verified score

Posts: 165

Kudos: 121

[1]

10 Jul 2026, 06:58

Kudos

Bookmarks

Premise: Traditionally, W and R developed their ideas independently. R's notes on W's book were found. Some scholars claim this proves R was influenced. But professor says this conclusion is too strong because the notes cover only the early non metaphysical part of the book.

Analysing answer choices
A) This is incorrect. BF1 supports opposing view, not professor's view
B) BF2 is evidence, not the professor's conclusion. This is wrong
C) BF1 is evidence used by others to support a conclusion the professor rejects
BF2 is and evidence supporting the professor's own conclusion
D) BF1 is not an intermediate conclusion. This is wrong
E) BF2 does not strength BF1, it undermines its importance.

Therefore answer is C

Bunuel

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.

Reon

Joined: 16 Sep 2025

Last visit: 08 Sep 2026

Posts: 298

Own Kudos:

201

[1]

Given Kudos: 20

GMAT Focus 1: 575 Q78 V78 DI79 Verified score

Posts: 298

Kudos: 201

[1]

10 Jul 2026, 06:59

Kudos

Bookmarks

BF 1: the notes precedes Rusells own conception of the metaphysics of language.
BF 2: Rusells notes are restricted to early parts of Wittgenstein launches into his investigation of the metaphysics of language.
The first bold face is an evidence that supports the conclusion that is criticised by the professor. And the second boldface is the new evidence that supports the professors own conclusion.

A. It is not an evidence of the professors, and it is an evidence of the opposing view.....Wrong
B. The second bold face is not the professor’s conclusion........Wrong
C. The first evidence used in support of a conclusion criticised by the professor, and the second is the evidence offered to support the professors own position.......Correct
D. The first gold place does not support the intermediate conclusion.......Wrong
E. The second boldface is not an information that corroborates that evidence.....Wrong

C

topgmat25

Joined: 15 Dec 2025

Last visit: 27 Jul 2026

Posts: 150

Own Kudos:

139

[1]

Posts: 150

Kudos: 139

[1]

10 Jul 2026, 07:02

Kudos

Bookmarks

Critics believe the traditional opinion, that Russell and Wittgenstein worked independently, is false. They base this on the discovery of Russell's notes (first bold). Professor's position is against the critics' position. Second bold provides evidence used in support of professor's position.

A The first supports professor's position -> false.

B The first supports professor's position -> false.

C The first is evidence for the opposing side's argument. The second is evidence for the professor's argument. Correct answer.

D The first supports professor's position -> false

E The second doesn't corroborate the first. It contradicts the first.

The answer is C

TallGuitar

Joined: 18 Jun 2026

Last visit: 07 Sep 2026

Posts: 16

Own Kudos:

[1]

Given Kudos: 11

Posts: 16

Kudos: 13

[1]

10 Jul 2026, 07:03

Kudos

Bookmarks

Option A: First is not the evidence for the professor.
Option B: Same Problem
Option C: THe first is the evidence used in support of a conclusion critised by the professor; The second is evidence that support the professor's own position - Correct
Option D: The second is not evidence against the professor's conclusion.
Option E: The second does not corroborate the first; it undermines the argument that used the first.

Answer: C

DishaSaha

Joined: 03 Nov 2024

Last visit: 30 Aug 2026

Posts: 64

Own Kudos:

[1]

Given Kudos: 24

GMAT Focus 1: 555 Q81 V75 DI78 Verified score

Posts: 64

Kudos: 49

[1]

10 Jul 2026, 07:11

Kudos

Bookmarks

Passage analysis,

Boldface1	Evidence to support some Historian's opinion	Criticised by Professor
Blodface2	Evidence to support professor's opinion	Supports professors opinion

Answer choice analysis,
A. BF1 explanation is not true. Although second is true. This choice is incorrect.
B.Both explanation of BF1 & BF2 is false. Incorrect.
C. Both explanation is true. Correct choice.
D. BF1 explanation is not correct, although secnd explanation is correct. Incorrect option.
E.Although BF1 explanation is correct nut BF2 explanation is not correct. Incorrect choice.

Bunuel

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.

Amarjeet25

Joined: 05 Mar 2021

Last visit: 08 Sep 2026

Posts: 18

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 213

Products:

Posts: 18

Kudos: 8

10 Jul 2026, 07:37

Kudos

Bookmarks

Correct option is C→ if cut marks are present, then they were slaughtered, if not then other case is possible.
E→ it written document is there, then may be at that location it is religious ceremony, but if they are not then both cases are possible.
D— there is no information about age available in argument, which will help me decide among two
A- out of scope(Other regions availability)
B - Animal hunted can be used for both purpose.