Something must be done to stop spam. In early days, people seldom rece

Question

Something must be done to stop spam.  In early days, people seldom received unsolicited email advertisement ; but now that numerous bulk email software and email address finders are developed to collect email address all around the world. Advertisers use email addresses to market their products and even sell such email lists to other advertisers. As a result, almost everyone ever get junk email, and sometime several and even tens of annoying emails a day.  So, relevant antispam regulations should be framed to stop unsolicited advertising.

The two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A. Background that the argument depends on and conclusion that can be drawn from the argument

B. Part of evidence that the argument includes, and inference that can be drawn from this passage

C. Pre-evidence that the argument depends on and part of evidence that supports the conclusion

D. Background that argument depends on and part of evidence that supports the conclusion

E. Pre-evidence that argument includes and a method that helps to supports that conclusion

Technext · Answer

Something must be done to stop spam. In early days, people seldom received unsolicited email advertisement; but now that numerous bulk email software and email address finders are developed to collect email address all around the world. Advertisers use email addresses to market their products and even sell such email lists to other advertisers. As a result, almost everyone ever get junk email, and sometime several and even tens of annoying emails a day. So, relevant anti-spam regulations should be framed to stop unsolicited advertising.

The two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

My Explanation :

Premise 1 : In early days, people seldom received unsolicited email advertisement.

Premise 2 : but now that numerous bulk email software and email address finders are developed to collect email address all around the world.

Premise 3 : Advertisers use email addresses to market their products and even sell such email lists to other advertisers.

Premise 4 : As a result, almost everyone ever get junk email, and sometime several and even tens of annoying emails a day.

Conclusion : Something must be done to stop spam.

Conclusion/Inference : So, relevant anti-spam regulations should be framed to stop unsolicited advertising. 
---> Conclusion because it uses the keyword 'So' 
---> Inference because the first sentence of the passage looks more as a conclusion than this one i.e., the second boldfaced statement.

On the basis of above info, we can eliminate at least option C, D & E. Now we have only options A & B left.

If we assume that option A is correct, then the second boldface statement should be the conclusion but IMO, the first statement of the passage should be the conclusion.  Also, if you go through option A , it states that the first boldface is a 'Background that the argument  depends on '.  Do you really think that the argument (conclusion)  depends on  the first boldface ?  Had that not been present, we could have still arrived at the conclusion with the help of remaining premises. If anything, the first boldface should only act as a supporting premise .

------------------------
 A . Background that the argument depends on and conclusion that can be drawn from the argument. ---> Explained above.

B . Part of evidence that the argument includes, and inference that can be drawn from this passage. ---> Explained above.

C . Pre-evidence that the argument depends on and part of evidence that supports the conclusion. ---> Second boldface is a conclusion/inference. So, discard it.

D . Background that argument depends on and part of evidence that supports the conclusion. ---> Second boldface is a conclusion/inference. So, discard it.

E . Pre-evidence that argument includes and a method that helps to supports that conclusion. ---> Second boldface is a conclusion/inference. So, discard it.
------------------------

So, by process of elimination, I go for option  B .

IMO, the options are not worded correctly. Is it from a GMAT source?

Regards,
Technext

sanjay_gmat · Answer

Technext, you might be right, but what I gather from this passage is that the author is comparing the present situation with the almost spam free world that used to exist in the past. This comparison is vital for the argument, as without knowing how things were before, how would you decide that it's time to pull the plug on spammers.. So, I choose A.

Technext · Answer

Hi sanjay_gmat,

IMO, argument here is the first statement of the passage. If I’m correct then the comparison should not be vital to reach the conclusion (argument). I feel that we can reach the conclusion without its (first boldface) help too.

Let others share their thought on this.

Regards,
Technext

IanStewart · Answer

I'm curious about the source of the question; while I could find the question in a few threads with a web search, none mentioned where the question was from.

The argument does not depend on the first bold-faced sentence, which rules out A. Still, the second bold-faced sentence is a conclusion, not an inference. An inference is a specific type of conclusion - it's a conclusion that can be deduced from facts, requiring no additional assumptions. An inference is not a viewpoint or a policy proposal. As we all know from GMAT CR questions, conclusions can be weakened or strengthened, and they can be flawed or they can be valid. An inference is always true, as long as the facts are true.

From the evidence presented, you might conclude that regulating junk email would be a good idea. Still, that's a point of view; it's not something you can logically deduce from the facts. It's only a logically valid inference if you make many assumptions not presented in the stem (junk email must be cut down, government regulation will be effective, there is no other alternative way the goal of reducing junk email could be achieved). It's a conclusion, not an inference.

ngoctraiden1905 · Answer

I dont think it's a garbage
One more evidence to choose B rather than A is that "relevant anti-spam regulations should be framed to stop unsolicited advertising" is only a suggestion, so can be considered inference, not a conclusion.

cledgard · Answer

It seems that you are not clear about the difference between an inference and a conclusion. I may arrive a conclusion, but this conclusion does not have to be true; however, an inference must be true according to the facts in the stimulus. In This case the conclusion is the opinion of the author. You may disagree with the conclusion, but it still is his conclusion. You cannot infer (deduce logically) that regulation is needed.

See previous post by IanStewart.

Jaya6 · Answer

can someone detail the difference between option B and E?

yuxiawu · Answer

I go for E because I think the first BF is pre-evidence.

Something must be done to stop spam. In early days, people seldom rece

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Something must be done to stop spam. In early days, people seldom rece

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia