egmat

A question for your guys. In the course you say that only the author can draw a conclusion, not a third partie, unless the author agrees with that conclusion. So here, the autor isn't drawing a conclusion, the author is stating a fact presented by a third partie (the studie in this case) so is it correct to consider this -> scientists over forty have generally spent too long in their field to be a Conclusion?..

Plus the language of the answer choice E seems to be in line with the rationale that the 2nd BF is not a conclusion, but is rather a fact\explanation\information.

This doesn't change the answer, but I think it makes the analisys more precise and avoids possible errors in other questions. Can an "explanation" be a conclusion? Well maybe it can, but only if drawn by the authot or if it is explicit that the author agrees with that fact, if drawn by a third partie.

Thank you!

Why do scientists produce fewer creative works after they cross forty?
There are two opposing explanations:
explanation 1: loss of creative capacity
explanation 2: they have spent a long time in the field (and hence they do not have anything new to contribute).

BF2 is the explanation 2 above, and BF1 is a statement supporting explanation 2.

Hence option E is correct.

The fastest way to eliminate D is:
BF1 and BF2 are on the same side of the argument. Option D states that BF1 and BF2 are on the opposing side. Hence D is wrong. This same side/ opposing side consideration is one of the fastest ways to eliminate options in BF questions.

C,D the argument never challenges the alternate explanation
E - correct, the alternate explanation is based on the findings presented in first BF statement and is favored by the author

IMHO, there is problem with your thinking process:
First, let's analyze the argument: There are 2 explanation for a situation, the 1st explanation is challenged and the 2nd one is favored by author. Evidence is given.
1st Bold Face ??? Evidence against 1st explanation (not against argument). The word "however" indicates this. In another word, the 1st BF is evidence supporting the 2nd explanation.
2nd Bold Face ??? The 2nd explanation (not the 1st one).

That's why (E) is correct.

I think your wrong identification of functions of 2BF leads to wrong choice.

I went through all the posts on this questions, but did not find valuable explanation why E is the correct answer.
For me it should be D.

Agrument favors: commonly thought that age brings loss of creativity. So lower creativity beyong 40
Argument against: Most highly creative scientists beyond 40 entered their field older than usual (Age does not affect creativity)--------BF1
Agrument favors: High creativity beyond 40 is due to the time spent on the field (Not because of age)------------------------------------BF2

Answer is D.
_________________

What was previously considered impossible is now obvious reality.
In the past, people used to open doors with their hands. Today, doors open "by magic" when people approach them

I chose C, but I got confused on what they refer to as the "argument"

Is the argument the main conclusion or is it everything after the counterpoint, which is the initial claim "It is commonly thought that this happens because aging by itself brings about a loss of creative capacity."?

In a general sense the first part is favorably presented by the author. Only E captures that gist for the first boldface.
_________________

Srinivasan Vaidyaraman
Sravna
http://www.sravnatestprep.com/best-online-gre-preparation.php

Improve Intuition and Your Score
Systematic Approaches

Let's start by identifying the author's conclusion:

• "the studies’ finding strongly suggests that the real reason why scientists over forty rarely produce highly creative work is not that they have aged but rather that scientists over forty have generally spent too long in their field."

Here's how the author reaches this conclusion:

• Scientists typically do their most creative work before the age of 40.
• The majority of scientists who reach age 40 have been working in their field for at least 15 years (i.e., they entered their field at age 25 or younger).
• There are atypical scientists who produce highly creative work after they've turned 40.
• Studies show that a disproportionately large number of these atypical scientists entered their field at an older age than is usual. Unlike the majority of scientists, they have likely been working in their field for fewer than 15 years. This provides an alternate explanation for creative work in a given scientific field: being relatively new to that field.
• Therefore, these studies suggest that the loss of creative capacity in scientists is caused by spending a long their in the same field, not simply by aging.

The author argues that the commonly held explanation ("aging by itself brings about a loss of creative capacity") is wrong.

• The first boldface statement is evidence (i.e. study results) that identifies an alternate cause of highly creative work: being relatively new to the field. As explained in this post, this alternate cause is the explanation that the argument favors.
• The second boldface statement incorporates that evidence into an alternate explanation for the loss of creative capacity: spending too long in a given field. This explanation is part of the author's argument against the commonly held thought.

I hope this helps!
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | GMAT blog | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars
Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply?
Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja and @GMATNinjaTwo in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99 | Time management on verbal