It is currently 21 Mar 2018, 11:52

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Historian: In the Drindian Empire, censuses were conducted

Author Message
Senior Manager
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Posts: 432
Historian: In the Drindian Empire, censuses were conducted [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2008, 11:36
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 100% (00:00) wrong based on 9 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Historian: In the Drindian Empire, censuses were conducted annually to determine the population of each village. Village census records for the last half of the 1600’s are remarkably complete. This very completeness makes one point stand out; in five different years, villages overwhelmingly reported significant population declines. Tellingly, each of those five years immediately followed an increase in a certain Drindian tax. This tax, which was assessed on villages, was computed by the central government using the annual census figures. Obviously, whenever the tax went up, villages had an especially powerful economic incentive to minimize the number of people they recorded; and concealing the size of a village’s population from government census takers would have been easy. Therefore, it is reasonable to think that the reported declines did not happen.

In the historian’s argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A. The first supplies a context for the historian’s argument; the second acknowledges a consideration that has been used to argue against the position the historian seeks to establish.
B. The first presents evidence to support the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second acknowledges a consideration that has been used to argue against that position.
C. The first provides a context for certain evidence that supports the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second is that position.
D. The first is a position for which the historian argues; the second is an assumption that serves as the basis of that argument.
E. The first is an assumption that the historian explicitly makes in arguing for a certain position; the second acknowledges a consideration that calls that assumption into question

How do you guys approach such questions ?
VP
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1325

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2008, 11:49
Nihit wrote:
Historian: In the Drindian Empire, censuses were conducted annually to determine the population of each village. Village census records for the last half of the 1600’s are remarkably complete. This very completeness makes one point stand out; in five different years, villages overwhelmingly reported significant population declines. Tellingly, each of those five years immediately followed an increase in a certain Drindian tax. This tax, which was assessed on villages, was computed by the central government using the annual census figures. Obviously, whenever the tax went up, villages had an especially powerful economic incentive to minimize the number of people they recorded; and concealing the size of a village’s population from government census takers would have been easy. Therefore, it is reasonable to think that the reported declines did not happen.

Second one is against first one ,says first is not true
First -> premise
Second -> concln

In the historian’s argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A. The first supplies a context for the historian’s argument; the second acknowledges a consideration that has been used to argue against the position the historian seeks to establish. -> incorrect ,second supports the concln of historian
B. The first presents evidence to support the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second acknowledges a consideration that has been used to argue against that position. -> second does not argue against position historian seeks ,instead it supports
C. The first provides a context for certain evidence that supports the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second is that position. -> first ad second are different and oppose each other
D. The first is a position for which the historian argues; the second is an assumption that serves as the basis of that argument. -> first is an evidence not position of argument
E. The first is an assumption that the historian explicitly makes in arguing for a certain position; the second acknowledges a consideration that calls that assumption into question -> this is correct ,explicit assumption second one opposes this

How do you guys approach such questions ?

please shed some light on the same
_________________

cheers
Its Now Or Never

Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Apr 2008
Posts: 401

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2008, 12:04
Nihit wrote:
Historian: In the Drindian Empire, censuses were conducted annually to determine the population of each village. Village census records for the last half of the 1600’s are remarkably complete. This very completeness makes one point stand out; in five different years, villages overwhelmingly reported significant population declines. Tellingly, each of those five years immediately followed an increase in a certain Drindian tax. This tax, which was assessed on villages, was computed by the central government using the annual census figures. Obviously, whenever the tax went up, villages had an especially powerful economic incentive to minimize the number of people they recorded; and concealing the size of a village’s population from government census takers would have been easy. Therefore, it is reasonable to think that the reported declines did not happen.

In the historian’s argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A. The first supplies a context for the historian’s argument; the second acknowledges a consideration that has been used to argue against the position the historian seeks to establish.
B. The first presents evidence to support the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second acknowledges a consideration that has been used to argue against that position.
C. The first provides a context for certain evidence that supports the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second is that position.
D. The first is a position for which the historian argues; the second is an assumption that serves as the basis of that argument.
E. The first is an assumption that the historian explicitly makes in arguing for a certain position; the second acknowledges a consideration that calls that assumption into question

How do you guys approach such questions ?

IMO B) ... tough one
Senior Manager
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Posts: 432

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2008, 12:13
Guys can u explain why you think, the BF is consideration , position, evidence or conclusion ?
VP
Joined: 30 Jun 2008
Posts: 1019

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2008, 12:22
4
KUDOS
http://gmatclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13782

Paul wrote:
Principle: something fundamental that we do not question. This would be somewhat stronger than a fact because it is not specific to a limited number of cases but instead, apply to a broader range of scenarios(and often deeper in meaning). For instance, you will not talk about the principle that crime is increasing in large cities. Instead, it is a fact which applies to large cities. However, you will talk about the principles of Physics or the fundamental principles of Human Rights. I believe principles convey a stronger connotation than mere facts.

Fact: something taken as true at face value (stats, historical events)

Evidence: what is used to support a conclusion (examples, stats, historical events). Although these may include facts, it is usually stronger than facts because they are direct elements needed for the conclusion to stand whereas facts are not necessary for the latter to stand

Pre-evidence: This is a bit of a stretch. It will not often be on the test but it seems very similar to "background" information as described below.

Background: Elements needed to put the evidence into context but which, as stand alone pieces of information, might not constitute what is called an evidence necessary to arrive at a conclusion. For instance, blood tests performed on one thousand persons may reveal that 35% of those persons were HIV infected. However, the background information could be that the test was performed in more underinformed regions of the world where AIDS knowledge is at a minimum. As you can see, the fact that the test was performed in more underinformed regions is not in and of itself an evidence because it does not allow us to come to a conclusion. Instead, the 35% stats, as a stand-alone piece of info, is what will lead us to the conclusion we want. However, the background info is also crucial and cannot be omitted; it is required background info.

Consideration: Something which was taken into account or given some thought before arriving to the conclusion.

Premise: This is usually a required statement to arrive at a conclusion. Evidence and facts want to prove something to you whereas premises are there to logically lead you to a conclusion. The best example of premises is the ones included in syllogisms. For instance, you can say that(premise1) when it rains, you go outside. Then, it rains(premise2). You have to be outside(conclusion).

Assumption: Unstated information which will link the argument to a logical conclusion. Without this, the argument falls apart.

Conclusion: Self-explanatory

Inference: Something that might not be explicitly stated or proved. For instance, you may say that 95% of GMAT test-takers have over 340. We can reasonably infer that Anthony will get more than 340 on his GMAT based on the fact given. I think the main difference b/w an inference and a conclusion is that the former might not be the final line of an argument. For instance, there could be facts/evidence given, an inference in b/w, and then the conclusion. An inference can be an intermediate step before the conclusion which will sum up the whole passage. Also, a conclusion seems to be stronger because it is based on stronger facts/evidence. As in my previous example, we can reasonably infer that Anthony got 340+ on his GMAT but we cannot conclude that he got 340+. See the nuance?

Feel free to disagree or add your thoughts to what I said. Some of these have very subtle differences though and in some cases, can even be interchanged.

Maybe this will be of some help here
_________________

"You have to find it. No one else can find it for you." - Bjorn Borg

Senior Manager
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Posts: 432

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2008, 12:24
thanks a ton mate!
VP
Joined: 30 Jun 2008
Posts: 1019

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2008, 12:36
3
KUDOS
Nihit wrote:
Historian: In the Drindian Empire, censuses were conducted annually to determine the population of each village. Village census records for the last half of the 1600’s are remarkably complete. This very completeness makes one point stand out; in five different years, villages overwhelmingly reported significant population declines. Tellingly, each of those five years immediately followed an increase in a certain Drindian tax. This tax, which was assessed on villages, was computed by the central government using the annual census figures. Obviously, whenever the tax went up, villages had an especially powerful economic incentive to minimize the number of people they recorded; and concealing the size of a village’s population from government census takers would have been easy. Therefore, it is reasonable to think that the reported declines did not happen.

In the historian’s argument, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A. The first supplies a context for the historian’s argument; the second acknowledges a consideration that has been used to argue against the position the historian seeks to establish.
B. The first presents evidence to support the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second acknowledges a consideration that has been used to argue against that position.
C. The first provides a context for certain evidence that supports the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second is that position.
D. The first is a position for which the historian argues; the second is an assumption that serves as the basis of that argument.
E. The first is an assumption that the historian explicitly makes in arguing for a certain position; the second acknowledges a consideration that calls that assumption into question

How do you guys approach such questions ?

This is how I approached this particular question. Please note that what I am going to do now might not be the right way to do these kind of questions; I am giving a shot at it

BF1 : Village census records for the last half of the 1600’s are remarkably complete - This seems more like a fact/ evidence to me.

BF2: reported declines did not happen - This is obviously what the author has concluded / or this is the author's final position.

Choice A) Second BF is not a consideration, it is in fact the conclusion. This option out

Choice B) Out for the same reason as A

Choice D) Second BF is not an Assumption !! D OUT

Now between C and E

Choice E) The first BF is NOT an assumption that the author makes. E OUT

This leaves us with Choice C) The first provides a context for certain evidence that supports the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second is that position.

Is C the right answer ? Can someone show/tell the right and sure-shot approach for BF.

BTW, BF CR are a rarity.

Thanks
_________________

"You have to find it. No one else can find it for you." - Bjorn Borg

Senior Manager
Joined: 02 Dec 2007
Posts: 432

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2008, 12:42
Expect to see 1 or 2 CR if you are doing well !
Yup OA is C . +1 for you.
So I guess position can also be a conclusion !
VP
Joined: 30 Jun 2008
Posts: 1019

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2008, 12:48
Nihit wrote:
Expect to see 1 or 2 CR if you are doing well !
Yup OA is C . +1 for you.
So I guess position can also be a conclusion !

Yes I guess so too. Position can be conclusion
_________________

"You have to find it. No one else can find it for you." - Bjorn Borg

Re: Bold Face CR   [#permalink] 20 Sep 2008, 12:48
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Historian: In the Drindian Empire, censuses were conducted

Moderators: GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.