Anshuman0902 wrote:
hi bunuel !
confused between A and B
and end up marking A , eager to know why B is wrong
as it state ' specific example' is this the reason ?
My take on this:-[i][/i]
Whittaker: There can be no such thing as the number of medical school students who drop out before their second year, because if they drop out, they never have a second year.Some example
Hudson: By your reasoning I cannot help but become rich, because there is similarly no such thing as my dying before my first million dollars is in the bank.Use some another example to describe that his above example doesn't make sense
Hudson responds to Whittaker byexample in similar lines that is more easy to understand
Why?
To give message that his example does not make sense
Quote:
(A) showing that a relevantly analogous argument leads to an untenable conclusion
relevantly analogous argument= example similar or equivalent in some respects
untenable conclusion= not justifiable conclusion. in other words, the conclusion does not make sense
I think by now you would agree that A seems to be correct answer. Let's keep on hold.
Quote:
(B) citing a specific example to counter Whittaker’s general claim
strong reason to reject option B is Hudson's specific example doesn't go hand in hand with W's general claim.
Firstly, Whittaker claim is more of an example rather than general claim. His statement is more specific to a scenario.
Secondly, If I need to treat his statement as general claim then I expect Hudson statement to go into more details of medical students domain if Hudson's statement is to be treated as specific example.
So it is preferred to say both statements are more of an analogous example as both examples belongs to different domains.
Thus, I have no reason to stick to B when I am very much convinced with A that matches to my pre-thinking .
Hope it helps:) .