Last visit was: 20 Apr 2026, 20:45 It is currently 20 Apr 2026, 20:45
Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 20 Apr 2026
Posts: 109,701
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 105,779
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 109,701
Kudos: 810,296
 [10]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
8
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
sanjitscorps18
Joined: 26 Jan 2019
Last visit: 03 Mar 2026
Posts: 723
Own Kudos:
739
 [5]
Given Kudos: 130
Location: India
Schools: IMD'26
Products:
Schools: IMD'26
Posts: 723
Kudos: 739
 [5]
5
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
User avatar
joe123x
Joined: 03 Oct 2022
Last visit: 16 Oct 2025
Posts: 78
Own Kudos:
21
 [1]
Given Kudos: 53
GMAT 1: 610 Q40 V34
GMAT 1: 610 Q40 V34
Posts: 78
Kudos: 21
 [1]
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Mavisdu1017
Joined: 10 Aug 2021
Last visit: 04 Jan 2023
Posts: 343
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 226
Posts: 343
Kudos: 49
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I think none is correct, as BF1 is the main conclusion - this is no problem.
But I think BF2 is an example to justify the conclusion. Anybody can explain why BF2 weakens the conclusion?
User avatar
sanjitscorps18
Joined: 26 Jan 2019
Last visit: 03 Mar 2026
Posts: 723
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 130
Location: India
Schools: IMD'26
Products:
Schools: IMD'26
Posts: 723
Kudos: 739
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Mavisdu1017
I think none is correct, as BF1 is the main conclusion - this is no problem.
But I think BF2 is an example to justify the conclusion. Anybody can explain why BF2 weakens the conclusion?

The American Medical Association evaded the ethical problem (Argument's opinion - Conclusion)
It can be argued that when doctors use their stethoscopes to indicate whether the electric chair has done its job, they are assisting the executioner. (Author's opinion - Questioning the conclusion)

BF2 is stating that the AMA could not completely evade the ethical problem (conclusion in BF1). Hence it questions the conclusion.

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
Mavisdu1017
Joined: 10 Aug 2021
Last visit: 04 Jan 2023
Posts: 343
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 226
Posts: 343
Kudos: 49
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
sanjitscorps18
Mavisdu1017
I think none is correct, as BF1 is the main conclusion - this is no problem.
But I think BF2 is an example to justify the conclusion. Anybody can explain why BF2 weakens the conclusion?

The American Medical Association evaded the ethical problem (Argument's opinion - Conclusion)
It can be argued that when doctors use their stethoscopes to indicate whether the electric chair has done its job, they are assisting the executioner. (Author's opinion - Questioning the conclusion)

BF2 is stating that the AMA could not completely evade the ethical problem (conclusion in BF1). Hence it questions the conclusion.

Posted from my mobile device
Hey bro,sanjitscorps18
How do you comprehend BF2 means AMA could not evade the ethical problem?
Sorry I cannot understand, and my understanding is BF2 is an example case to explain how AMA evades ethical problem. Mind to explain? Thanks
User avatar
sanjitscorps18
Joined: 26 Jan 2019
Last visit: 03 Mar 2026
Posts: 723
Own Kudos:
739
 [1]
Given Kudos: 130
Location: India
Schools: IMD'26
Products:
Schools: IMD'26
Posts: 723
Kudos: 739
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
"The American Medical Association, responding to this issue, declared that a doctor should not participate in an execution. But it added that a doctor may determine or certify death in any situation."

By the above line the AMA essentially conveys that they would not participate in the lethal injection execution, however, they could still certify death. Hence the AMA evaded the moral question by not admitting to any direct involvement in the execution.

But, BF2 states that even verifying death implies a direct involvement in execution process. Hence it questions the conclusion represented by BF1. Hope it clarifies.

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
Mavisdu1017
Joined: 10 Aug 2021
Last visit: 04 Jan 2023
Posts: 343
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 226
Posts: 343
Kudos: 49
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
sanjitscorps18
"The American Medical Association, responding to this issue, declared that a doctor should not participate in an execution. But it added that a doctor may determine or certify death in any situation."

By the above line the AMA essentially conveys that they would not participate in the lethal injection execution, however, they could still certify death. Hence the AMA evaded the moral question by not admitting to any direct involvement in the execution.

But, BF2 states that even verifying death implies a direct involvement in execution process. Hence it questions the conclusion represented by BF1. Hope it clarifies.

Posted from my mobile device

Got you and much thx bro. I know where is my issue - I misunderstood (evade)
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 20 Apr 2026
Posts: 109,701
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 105,779
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 109,701
Kudos: 810,296
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
The death penalty involves medical doctors, who are sworn to preserve life, in the act of killing. This issue was much discussed after several states provided for execution by lethal injection. The American Medical Association, responding to this issue, declared that a doctor should not participate in an execution. But it added that a doctor may determine or certify death in any situation. The American Medical Association evaded the ethical problem. It can be argued that when doctors use their stethoscopes to indicate whether the electric chair has done its job, they are assisting the executioner.

In the argument given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A. The first is the main conclusion of the argument; the second states a position that the argument seeks to oppose.

B. The first provides evidence that has been used to oppose the main conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.

C. The first is a claim that has been used to reach the main conclusion of the argument; the second brings that conclusion into question.

D. The first is a position that the argument accepts; the second is the main conclusion of the argument.

E. The first states a conclusion that the argument reaches; the second calls that conclusion into question.


Experts' Global Video Explanation:

User avatar
PSKhore
Joined: 28 Apr 2025
Last visit: 27 Feb 2026
Posts: 190
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 112
Posts: 190
Kudos: 33
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
The death penalty involves medical doctors, who are sworn to preserve life, in the act of killing. This issue was much discussed after several states provided for execution by lethal injection. The American Medical Association, responding to this issue, declared that a doctor should not participate in an execution. But it added that a doctor may determine or certify death in any situation. The American Medical Association evaded the ethical problem. It can be argued that when doctors use their stethoscopes to indicate whether the electric chair has done its job, they are assisting the executioner.

In the argument given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A. The first is the main conclusion of the argument; the second states a position that the argument seeks to oppose.

B. The first provides evidence that has been used to oppose the main conclusion of the argument; the second is that conclusion.

C. The first is a claim that has been used to reach the main conclusion of the argument; the second brings that conclusion into question.

D. The first is a position that the argument accepts; the second is the main conclusion of the argument.

E. The first states a conclusion that the argument reaches; the second calls that conclusion into question.


 


This Month's Butler Questions are Sponsored and Provided by Experts' Global
for SC Butler and CR Butler

 

Experts Global

 


I was stuck between C and E primarily because I was confused if the first bold part was a conclusion or a claim.
This should be evaluated based on whether the first bold part requires anything to support it, in that case it's a conclusion.
If it doesn't require anything to support it, it's a fact/premise.
The first bold statement clearly requires the earlier two sentences to support it, hence it's a conclusion.
And hence E is correct.
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7391 posts
494 posts
358 posts