Historian: In the Drindian Empire, censuses were conducted annually to

Question Type: Bold Face

Conclusion: It is reasonable to think that the reported population declines in census did not actually happen.
BF1: Village census records for the last half of the 1600’s are remarkably complete - Surprising fact
BF2: Whenever the tax went up, villages had an especially powerful economic incentive to minimize the number of people they recorded - Conclusion of the argument is derived from BF2

(A) The first presents a finding to support the position the historian seeks to establish; the second is a consideration that has been used to argue against that position. - BF2 doesn't argue against the position that the historian seeks to establish.

(B) The first provides a context for certain evidence that supports the position that the historian seeks to establish; the second is the judgement advanced to support that position. - Correct.

(C) The first is a position that the historian seeks to establish; the second is evidence that has been used to argue against that position. - BF2 isn't against the position that the historian seeks to establish

(D) The first is an assumption that the historian explicitly makes in support of a certain position; the second is that position. - BF1 is not an assumption.

(E) The first is the claim that the historian rejects; the second is a conclusion drawn to justify that rejection. - The historian doesn't reject BF1.

Answer: B

Hi Experts,

Please help in rejecting Option E.

The 1st BF "Village census records for the last half of the 1600???s are remarkably complete"- How can we be sure this is not a claim and its a fact.

As per the conclusion of the argument "Therefore, it is reasonable to think that the reported declines did not happen." can we say that the historians are rejecting this claim?

I rejected this option solely based on the 2nd part of Option E "the second is a conclusion drawn to justify that rejection.". The 2nd BF supports the conclusion and isn't the conclusion itself. Though the 2nd BF does seem to be some sort of claim.

Please advise whether my basis for selecting Option B.

The historian's position is the final line of the passage. We are basing this on the below points.

1. Each of those five years immediately followed an increase in a certain Drindian tax.
2. Whenever the tax went up, villages had an especially powerful economic incentive to minimize the number of people they recorded

Thus the records (1st BF) were the basis on which we could conclude that the tax increase in those specific five years was the reason why there was a drop in the census.

Thanks

• Facts are stated as facts. Claims—which need to be supported with an argument—will be expressed in language that shows that they're claims.

and, of course,
• The nature of claims is that they have to be supported with logical argumentation, starting from statements that are NOT claims (factual premises). Therefore, if something is a claim, the passage has to present an argument to support it!


As an illustration, my friend Sonia is 44 years old. If her age is already an established fact (that's being used to argue something else), then this will be stated as
Sonia is 44 years old.

If, on the other hand, the speaker/writer doesn't actually know Sonia's age, and instead is trying to support a guess (= a claim) that she's about 44 years old, then, first, the argument must actually BE there, and, second, the conclusion about her age needs to appear in different language.
e.g.,
[[ARGUMENT—using e.g., her high school graduation year, or other clues to her age]] ... so Sonia must be about 44 years old.



Just realizing that "Census records are very complete" is a statement of fact, by the way, is enough for you to eliminate C and E—because a factual statement cannot be a "position" or a "claim".

You can eliminate D as soon as you set eyes on it—without even needing to look at the passage!
An assumption, by definition, is not stated! Therefore, any answer choice that calls a statement that's actually written in the text of the passage an "assumption" is automatically wrong, as it immediately violates the basic definition of an assumption.

You're good with everything here.

One thing worth noting: In THIS part of your post—specifically, where you wrote "The records (first boldface) were the basis on which we can conclude..."—you definitely have a firm understanding that "the records" are things that historians HAVE, and that they can physically look at.
This means, in turn, that statements made about those records—such as the first boldfaced statement—are going to be factual observations.

In other words, if you look at the words that YOU wrote right here, you've got exactly what you need to make the realization that boldface #1 is a statement of fact.

Understanding the argument -
Historian: In the Drindian Empire, censuses were conducted annually to determine the population of each village. Fact
Village census records for the last half of the 1600’s are remarkably complete. Fact
This very completeness makes one point stand out; in five different years, villages overwhelmingly reported significant population declines. Fact
Tellingly, each of those five years immediately followed an increase in a certain Drindian tax. Fact
This tax, which was assessed on villages, was computed by the central government using the annual census figures. Fact
Obviously, whenever the tax went up, villages had an especially powerful economic incentive to minimize the number of people they recorded (Author's judgment or belief); 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. The main conclusion that the argument seeks to establish.

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

(A) The first presents a finding to support the position the historian seeks to establish (ok); the second is a consideration that has been used to argue against that position. (No. It supports the main conclusion)

(B) The first provides a context for certain evidence that supports the position that the historian seeks to establish (ok); the second is the judgement advanced to support that position. (ok)

(C) The first is a position that the historian seeks to establish (No its not the main conclusion); the second is evidence that has been used to argue against that position. (No, moreover its not supporting the first boldface)

(D) The first is an assumption that the historian explicitly makes in support of a certain position (It's a fact and not an assumption); the second is that position (the first BF is not stated to support BF2. Instead, the BF 2 is judgment-advanced to support the main conclusion.

(E) The first is the claim that the historian rejects (the first is not a claim. Its a fact and the historian is not rejecting it); the second is a conclusion drawn to justify that rejection. (the second is not a conclusion drawn to support BF1. Instead it used to support the main conclusion)

Exactly, B didn't sound too appealing at least on the initial analysis but the rest of them felt wrong.

a] Purpose of each bold face
1. Fact
2. Analysis or POV

b] Relationship b/w each-other
Highlight the flaw in reporting

c] Relationship with Cx
1. Doesn't impact much
2. Go with the cx

a. wrong, first doesn't seek to establish anything.
c. wrong, first doesn't seek to establish anything.
d. wrong, second is not a position
e. wrong, second is not a position
b. Correct by eliminating above