Since no one returns from death, we can never be certain about what pa

First off, this is a type of LSAT logical reasoning that doesn't have a direct counterpart on GMAT critical reasoning, so don't expect to see a question just like this on the GMAT. Inference, assumption, strengthen, weaken - those questions all exist pretty much identically on both the LSAT and GMAT, but the LSAT has a few question types (those involving formal logic and the "contrapositive," these that ask for the main point instead of to draw a conclusion or strengthen/weaken a conclusion) that extend past the scope of GMAT CR.

That said, there are two pretty big context clues here that can help you learn lessons applicable to GMAT CR and RC. In finding the main point of the argument, I'd look at:

1) The word "however" - a common line of rhetoric involves an author bringing up a generally-accepted or at least logically-coherent point and then using "however" to transition to a more narrow/recent/proposed main point (e.g. "in general, people believe X. However, recent research suggests Y..."). The word "however" is a good place to look both in CR and in RC for a shift from conventional wisdom or introductory context to what the author is really trying to get at.

2) The sentence "Why should we think so?" An important method for finding an author's conclusion in a CR context is what we call at Veritas Prep the "Why Test" - in order to be a conclusion, a statement needs to have something else in the paragraph explaining why that's true. If there's no explanation of why, it's just given as a premise or as context. Here the author even uses the word "why" to show you that he's using the next sentence to explain the previous one as a claim he's making. That signals that he's building a case for "it is quite possible that death presents itself as a glorious experience."

So look out for these rhetorical devices: the word "however" is commonly used as a transition from background information (or a conflicting viewpoint) to the author's main point, and words that signal evidence (because, since, or a sentence saying "why should we think that?") can signal that the author is about to give reasons why his main point should be believed.

Im confused between B and C but u went for B because of this line from the argument

However, for the mentally alert, it is quite possible that death presents itself as an unbelievably glorious experience, a flight into an entirely new universe of sensation. Why should we think so?

Posted from my mobile device

Must be (B) as the argument Branches in to stems from the fact about dying experience....

Unconscious : No recollection.
Conscious :............... have experienced what goes through the consciousness of those who are not so fortunate......

Further the author mentions " it is quite possible that death presents itself as an unbelievably glorious experience, "

Thus the entire argument hinges on option choice (B) dying can be a glorious experience
_________________

Well.... I understand the OA, but not able to understand how to cancel option D.

Regards,
Tamal

Posted from my mobile device

Hw option B is correct
The whole para is about what is going on in mind of dying person. Correct me if i am wrong

Well, you're partially correct! Your line of thought is what should bring you to option B. The "author" of the paragraph discusses what might go on in the mind of a dying person, and using such information, concludes that "it is quite possible that death presents itself as an unbelievably glorious experience, a flight into an entirely new universe of sensation". Thus, if the paragraph discuss what goes on in the mind of a dying person, and uses this information to reach the conclusion that dying is an unbelievably glorious experience, this (dying is a glorious experience) should be the point of the paragraph.

This is a Main Idea question -- a rare (for the GMAT) sub-type of Method of Reasoning.

Treat Main Idea questions essentially like Role of Boldface Portion(s) questions. Specifically, Main Idea wants you to find the conclusion stated within the given passage. To find it, rely on indicator words and other tools to break down the argument. Brian mentions that and the Why Test, and I agree.

The most important words here are "since" -- premise indicator -- and "however" -- counterargument indicator. I'd also draw attention to "why" -- in this usage, suggestive of a conclusion followed by a premise explaining it -- and "for example" -- premise indicator.

Using these words alone, we can say the following:

* "no one returns from death," must be premise because of "since."
* "we can never be certain about what passes through the mind of the dying person" must be some manner of conclusion since it fits the common "since [premise], [conclusion]" structure. But since it's immediately followed by "however" and switching sides in the argument, it's not plausibly the ultimate conclusion we're looking for.
* "Some people who have been reprieved from “certain” death at the last moment have experienced what goes through the consciousness of those who are not so fortunate." must be premise, since it follows and attempts to answer the preceding "why" question.
* "parachutists who have survived falls report experiences that resemble psychedelic “trips.”" must be premise because of "for example."

All that's left is "for the mentally alert, it is quite possible that death presents itself as an unbelievably glorious experience, a flight into an entirely new universe of sensation." This must represent the ultimate conclusion. (And, although it's not necessary to be so abstemious, I can say that without even really needing to read and understand almost anything besides the indicator words!)

B is the only answer that plausibly describes the sentences we've identified as the conclusion.
_________________

Since no one returns from death, we can never be certain about what passes through the mind of the dying person.
Dont we have 2 statements in juxtaposition, and hence an indicator of the primary point of the passage?

I don't think the sentence you've quoted represents juxtaposition. Even if it did, why would the presence of juxtaposition automatically imply that that sentence is the primary point of the passage?

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
_________________