Hi CruelForm,Great question. The key is to separate what the author
reports from what the author actually
argues for, and the little word
"But" is your signal.
Walk through the flow of the argument:
- The author reports the press coverage of Ghosh and the
popular view that "mathematicians are antisocial loners." This is a view the author is describing,
not endorsing.
- Then comes the pivot:
"But mathematicians clearly form a tightly knit community, frequently collaborating on important efforts..." The word "But" flips from
their view to
the author's own view.
- Everything after it is support: "frequently collaborating," and "teams of researchers are working together to extend Ghosh's findings."
So ask the classic test:
what is the author trying to convince me of? The author isn't trying to prove Ghosh has no job - that's just a fact. The author is trying to prove that mathematicians
are social and collaborative. That claim is the point everything else is aimed at, which is exactly what makes it the
conclusion.
Notice the roles line up cleanly:
- "He has no job... lives alone... refused all acclaim" = a specific case that
looks like a loner (a counterexample to the author's point).
- "Mathematicians clearly form a tightly knit community" = the author's own claim (the conclusion).
That's why answer
D describes the second boldface as "that generalization" - the generalization the author is asserting.
A quick way to build this habit: whenever you see
"but," "however," "yet," in an argument, the author's real opinion almost always sits right after it. Try re-reading the passage and pausing at "But" - you can feel the argument turn toward the author's side there.
Answer: DCruelForm
why is this the conclusion mathematicians clearly form a tightly knit community,?