Last visit was: 23 Apr 2026, 01:02 It is currently 23 Apr 2026, 01:02
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
Marcab
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Last visit: 22 Jan 2021
Posts: 840
Own Kudos:
4,943
 [35]
Given Kudos: 221
Status:Retaking after 7 years
Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V39
GPA: 3.75
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V39
Posts: 840
Kudos: 4,943
 [35]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
34
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 22 Apr 2026
Posts: 16,439
Own Kudos:
79,390
 [5]
Given Kudos: 484
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,439
Kudos: 79,390
 [5]
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
User avatar
MOKSH
Joined: 01 Dec 2012
Last visit: 21 Sep 2019
Posts: 28
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 8
Concentration: Finance, Operations
GPA: 2.9
Products:
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Marcab
Joined: 03 Feb 2011
Last visit: 22 Jan 2021
Posts: 840
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 221
Status:Retaking after 7 years
Location: United States (NY)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V39
GPA: 3.75
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V39
Posts: 840
Kudos: 4,943
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Actually this is the question. I too got it wrong and too feel pessimistic about this question.
User avatar
Carcass
User avatar
Board of Directors
Joined: 01 Sep 2010
Last visit: 22 Apr 2026
Posts: 4,712
Own Kudos:
37,834
 [4]
Given Kudos: 4,925
Posts: 4,712
Kudos: 37,834
 [4]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
3
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Marcab
Recently, motorists have begun purchasing more and more fuel-efficient economy and hybrid cars that consume fewer gallons of gasoline per mile traveled. There has been debate as to whether we can conclude that these purchases will actually lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists. The answer is no, since motorists with more fuel-efficient vehicles are likely to drive more total miles than they did before switching to a more fuel-efficient car, negating the gains from higher fuel-efficiency.

Which of the following best describes the roles of the portions in bold?

1)The first describes a premise that is accepted as true; the second introduces a conclusion that is opposed by the argument as a whole.

2)The first states a position taken by the argument; the second introduces a conclusion that is refuted by additional evidence.

3)The first is evidence that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides information to undermine the force of that evidence.

4)The first is a conclusion that is later shown to be false; the second is the evidence by which that conclusion is proven false.

5)The first is a premise that is later shown to be false; the second is a conclusion that is later shown to be false.

Dude take control of the question.

Sometimes we tend to be confused by the question but the trick to these questions is to understand the overall structure and the sigle phrases.

The first is a fact or evidence. so I write evidece or something.

The second seems the conclusion I have doubts.

the third is not a conclusion is something similar to a fact or something. So the 2 \(IS\) the conclusion.

Once you have established that, reorganize the information.

A premise or something; a conclusion and in the end a fact the in somehow support the conclusion

Now I have A and C (the others a clearly wrong)

But C says : The first is evidence that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides information to undermine the force of that evidence.

Basically the first one support something that the argument oppose as whole and the second undermine the first bold part and establish once again the start position.........mmmm it doesn't have much sense.

A The first describes a premise that is accepted as true; the second introduces a conclusion that is opposed by the argument as a whole.

is accepted as true because we know thanks to "have begun" is already done by motorists. the second is the conclusion and then the argument go against it and we know this because the 3 sentence is introduced by " The answer is no"

I was quite tough.

Stay strong :)
User avatar
gmacforjyoab
Joined: 07 May 2012
Last visit: 22 Oct 2017
Posts: 46
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 27
Location: United States
Posts: 46
Kudos: 586
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I do not understand. Isn't it kinda obvious that the conclusion is " the answer is no - that there will not a reduction in in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists".
Conclusion cannot be "There has been debate as to whether we can conclude that these purchases will actually lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists. " , since this is just a mere observation by the author and not an opinion or any such statement that makes this a conclusion. None of the answers make sense . Option A would have made sense , if it doesn't mention the second sentence to be the conclusion

-Jyothi
avatar
pjaseem
Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Last visit: 30 Nov 2013
Posts: 13
Own Kudos:
28
 [2]
Given Kudos: 6
Location: United States
Concentration: International Business, Entrepreneurship
Schools: NTU '15 (S)
GPA: 3.08
WE:Marketing (Manufacturing)
Schools: NTU '15 (S)
Posts: 13
Kudos: 28
 [2]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
gmacforjyoab
I do not understand. Isn't it kinda obvious that the conclusion is " the answer is no - that there will not a reduction in in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists".
Conclusion cannot be "There has been debate as to whether we can conclude that these purchases will actually lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists. " , since this is just a mere observation by the author and not an opinion or any such statement that makes this a conclusion. None of the answers make sense . Option A would have made sense , if it doesn't mention the second sentence to be the conclusion

-Jyothi


The conclusion of the the whole argument is no doubt the last sentence . The second sentence is a sub conclusion made from the premises given in the first sentence but the author opposes this sub conclusion(2 nd sentence) in the overall argument

Take away : There can me multiple sub conclusions/inferences but there can be just one overall conclusion.
Hope i made sense
User avatar
gmacforjyoab
Joined: 07 May 2012
Last visit: 22 Oct 2017
Posts: 46
Own Kudos:
586
 [2]
Given Kudos: 27
Location: United States
Posts: 46
Kudos: 586
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
pjaseem
gmacforjyoab
I do not understand. Isn't it kinda obvious that the conclusion is " the answer is no - that there will not a reduction in in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists".
Conclusion cannot be "There has been debate as to whether we can conclude that these purchases will actually lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists. " , since this is just a mere observation by the author and not an opinion or any such statement that makes this a conclusion. None of the answers make sense . Option A would have made sense , if it doesn't mention the second sentence to be the conclusion

-Jyothi


The conclusion of the the whole argument is no doubt the last sentence . The second sentence is a sub conclusion made from the premises given in the first sentence but the author opposes this sub conclusion(2 nd sentence) in the overall argument

Take away : There can me multiple sub conclusions/inferences but there can be just one overall conclusion.
Hope i made sense


I Still don't see it . I agree that a passage can have main conclusion and sub conclusion. But this does not sound like a sub conclusion either . - "There has been a debate of weather etc " this kinda implies that "There is a debate that weather something will happen or not happen ". Firstly , answering NO to this does not qualify as opposing it. Secondly , sentences that sound like " There has been a debate" , cannot be conclusions/sub conclusions . They are premises .
I dont know if I am missing something .
avatar
pjaseem
Joined: 16 Mar 2013
Last visit: 30 Nov 2013
Posts: 13
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 6
Location: United States
Concentration: International Business, Entrepreneurship
Schools: NTU '15 (S)
GPA: 3.08
WE:Marketing (Manufacturing)
Schools: NTU '15 (S)
Posts: 13
Kudos: 28
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
gmacforjyoab
pjaseem
gmacforjyoab
I do not understand. Isn't it kinda obvious that the conclusion is " the answer is no - that there will not a reduction in in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists".
Conclusion cannot be "There has been debate as to whether we can conclude that these purchases will actually lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists. " , since this is just a mere observation by the author and not an opinion or any such statement that makes this a conclusion. None of the answers make sense . Option A would have made sense , if it doesn't mention the second sentence to be the conclusion

-Jyothi


The conclusion of the the whole argument is no doubt the last sentence . The second sentence is a sub conclusion made from the premises given in the first sentence but the author opposes this sub conclusion(2 nd sentence) in the overall argument

Take away : There can me multiple sub conclusions/inferences but there can be just one overall conclusion.
Hope i made sense


I Still don't see it . I agree that a passage can have main conclusion and sub conclusion. But this does not sound like a sub conclusion either . - "There has been a debate of weather etc " this kinda implies that "There is a debate that weather something will happen or not happen ". Firstly , answering NO to this does not qualify as opposing it. Secondly , sentences that sound like " There has been a debate" , cannot be conclusions/sub conclusions . They are premises .
I dont know if I am missing something .






"There has been debate as to whether we can conclude" If you rephrase that it's " can we conclude that A is true"?

You see its not necessarily the authors conclusion.Its someone else's conclusion which the author opposes.The authors conclusion is at the end.

When the author says " There is a debate" it doesnt necessarily mean that he has seen a bunch of people debating about it.He is showing us that some people might take the premise in first line and conclude that A is true.In the last sentence he corrects that conclusion and says B is true

Got it now :) :) :| Please tell me you have got it :shock: A kudos would be nive :)
User avatar
keats
Joined: 28 Nov 2014
Last visit: 08 Jun 2019
Posts: 727
Own Kudos:
1,379
 [1]
Given Kudos: 86
Concentration: Strategy
GPA: 3.71
Products:
Posts: 727
Kudos: 1,379
 [1]
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
VeritasPrepKarishma - Can you please explain A and C. I am puzzled that how can second part of A says that the 2nd boldface is a conclusion?
Please if you can clarify. Many thanks in advance!
avatar
kaiserkaran
Joined: 29 May 2016
Last visit: 03 Oct 2020
Posts: 9
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 121
Location: India
GMAT 1: 580 Q42 V27
GMAT 2: 550 Q42 V25
GMAT 2: 550 Q42 V25
Posts: 9
Kudos: 7
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
VeritasPrepKarishma
Marcab
Recently, motorists have begun purchasing more and more fuel-efficient economy and hybrid cars that consume fewer gallons of gasoline per mile traveled. There has been debate as to whether we can conclude that these purchases will actually lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists. The answer is no, since motorists with more fuel-efficient vehicles are likely to drive more total miles than they did before switching to a more fuel-efficient car, negating the gains from higher fuel-efficiency.

Which of the following best describes the roles of the portions in bold?

1)The first describes a premise that is accepted as true; the second introduces a conclusion that is opposed by the argument as a whole.

2)The first states a position taken by the argument; the second introduces a conclusion that is refuted by additional evidence.

3)The first is evidence that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides information to undermine the force of that evidence.

4)The first is a conclusion that is later shown to be false; the second is the evidence by which that conclusion is proven false.

5)The first is a premise that is later shown to be false; the second is a conclusion that is later shown to be false.

Responding to a pm:

(A) vs (C)

Recently, motorists have begun purchasing more and more fuel-efficient economy and hybrid cars that consume fewer gallons of gasoline per mile traveled. There has been debate as to whether we can conclude that these purchases will actually lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists.
The answer is no, since motorists with more fuel-efficient vehicles are likely to drive more total miles than they did before switching to a more fuel-efficient car, negating the gains from higher fuel-efficiency.

What is the conclusion of this argument?

"These purchases will NOT lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists."

This is the position the argument takes.

So the position that the argument opposes is

"These purchases will actually lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists."

This has been given in our second bold statement: There has been debate as to whether we can conclude that these purchases will actually lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists.

This statement introduces the opposing conclusion.

(A) The first describes a premise that is accepted as true; the second introduces a conclusion that is opposed by the argument as a whole.

The first bold statement: Recently, motorists have begun purchasing more and more fuel-efficient economy and hybrid cars that consume fewer gallons of gasoline per mile traveled.

This is a premise and has been accepted as true. We know it has been accepted as true since the last line ends with - "...negating the gains from higher fuel-efficiency"
We have seen above that the second bold statement tells us about a conclusion that the argument opposes.

So (A) is correct.

(C)The first is evidence that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides information to undermine the force of that evidence.

The evidence is "Recently, motorists have begun purchasing more and more fuel-efficient economy and hybrid cars that consume fewer gallons of gasoline per mile traveled."
That is, "the motorists have begun purchasing fuel efficient cars that give better mileage."

The second bold statement does not undermine this evidence at all. In fact, it builds up on it with - will it lead to overall decreased fuel consumption?

Hence (C) is not correct.






Can u please explain why B is wrong?
avatar
max0010
Joined: 19 Sep 2015
Last visit: 17 Sep 2018
Posts: 16
Own Kudos:
44
 [1]
Given Kudos: 36
Posts: 16
Kudos: 44
 [1]
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Marcab
Recently, motorists have begun purchasing more and more fuel-efficient economy and hybrid cars that consume fewer gallons of gasoline per mile traveled. There has been debate as to whether we can conclude that these purchases will actually lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists. The answer is no, since motorists with more fuel-efficient vehicles are likely to drive more total miles than they did before switching to a more fuel-efficient car, negating the gains from higher fuel-efficiency.

Which of the following best describes the roles of the portions in bold?

1)The first describes a premise that is accepted as true; the second introduces a conclusion that is opposed by the argument as a whole.

2)The first states a position taken by the argument; the second introduces a conclusion that is refuted by additional evidence.

3)The first is evidence that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides information to undermine the force of that evidence.

4)The first is a conclusion that is later shown to be false; the second is the evidence by which that conclusion is proven false.

5)The first is a premise that is later shown to be false; the second is a conclusion that is later shown to be false.


This is fairly straightforward question, and here is how I approached it. The jargon such as premise, conclusion etc we use to tackle a CR question is great, but reading a really big prompt on the screen is a daunting task in itself and I personally get confused as to which sentence means what. So to keep it simple let's take one sentence at a time, we start with the first sentence, "Motorist have begun... per mile travelled", what does this sentence tell you, apart from the actual semantics of the sentence, the sentence is pure information, no judgements, no opinions offered by the author, sort of a premise, so keep it aside. Now the next sentence, "There has been ... all motorists", this too is actually a fact, essentially an ideal conclusion that would be true in an ideal world, cool, so we have something other than a premise here. Let's move on to the next sentence "The answer is no ... fuel-efficiency", ah, now you can hear the author talk, take a closer look at this sentence, there is some explicit reasoning given by the author and it starts with since, so the part after the 'since' is actually the premise of the author's intended conclusion which is "no, the ideal conclusion we stated above is not true". Now let's get to some eliminations:

1)The first describes a premise that is accepted as true; the second introduces a conclusion that is opposed by the argument as a whole.
Perfect this is what we want!

2)The first states a position taken by the argument; the second introduces a conclusion that is refuted by additional evidence.
As described above, the first sentence is certainly not a position taken by the argument, the second part of this option is actually correct

3)The first is evidence that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides information to undermine the force of that evidence.
The first sentence is in fact evidence to support a position that the argument apposes, but the second does not undermine the force of that evidence, in fact, the second is actually an inference made on the evidence.

4)The first is a conclusion that is later shown to be false; the second is the evidence by which that conclusion is proven false.
Duh, the first is definitely not a conclusion, out!

5)The first is a premise that is later shown to be false; the second is a conclusion that is later shown to be false.
the author never refutes the evidence presented in the first sentence, out!
User avatar
hellosanthosh2k2
Joined: 02 Apr 2014
Last visit: 07 Dec 2020
Posts: 360
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 1,227
Location: India
Schools: XLRI"20
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.5
Schools: XLRI"20
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
Posts: 360
Kudos: 619
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
VeritasPrepKarishma
Marcab
Recently, motorists have begun purchasing more and more fuel-efficient economy and hybrid cars that consume fewer gallons of gasoline per mile traveled. There has been debate as to whether we can conclude that these purchases will actually lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists. The answer is no, since motorists with more fuel-efficient vehicles are likely to drive more total miles than they did before switching to a more fuel-efficient car, negating the gains from higher fuel-efficiency.

Which of the following best describes the roles of the portions in bold?

1)The first describes a premise that is accepted as true; the second introduces a conclusion that is opposed by the argument as a whole.

2)The first states a position taken by the argument; the second introduces a conclusion that is refuted by additional evidence.

3)The first is evidence that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides information to undermine the force of that evidence.

4)The first is a conclusion that is later shown to be false; the second is the evidence by which that conclusion is proven false.

5)The first is a premise that is later shown to be false; the second is a conclusion that is later shown to be false.

Responding to a pm:

(A) vs (C)

Recently, motorists have begun purchasing more and more fuel-efficient economy and hybrid cars that consume fewer gallons of gasoline per mile traveled. There has been debate as to whether we can conclude that these purchases will actually lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists.
The answer is no, since motorists with more fuel-efficient vehicles are likely to drive more total miles than they did before switching to a more fuel-efficient car, negating the gains from higher fuel-efficiency.

What is the conclusion of this argument?

"These purchases will NOT lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists."

This is the position the argument takes.

So the position that the argument opposes is

"These purchases will actually lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists."

This has been given in our second bold statement: There has been debate as to whether we can conclude that these purchases will actually lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists.

This statement introduces the opposing conclusion.

(A) The first describes a premise that is accepted as true; the second introduces a conclusion that is opposed by the argument as a whole.

The first bold statement: Recently, motorists have begun purchasing more and more fuel-efficient economy and hybrid cars that consume fewer gallons of gasoline per mile traveled.

This is a premise and has been accepted as true. We know it has been accepted as true since the last line ends with - "...negating the gains from higher fuel-efficiency"
We have seen above that the second bold statement tells us about a conclusion that the argument opposes.

So (A) is correct.

(C)The first is evidence that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides information to undermine the force of that evidence.

The evidence is "Recently, motorists have begun purchasing more and more fuel-efficient economy and hybrid cars that consume fewer gallons of gasoline per mile traveled."
That is, "the motorists have begun purchasing fuel efficient cars that give better mileage."

The second bold statement does not undermine this evidence at all. In fact, it builds up on it with - will it lead to overall decreased fuel consumption?

Hence (C) is not correct.

Hi Karishma,

Thanks for explanation.
I chose A, but still had some doubts.
the second bold face - a conclusion? - is it not a position that argument as a whole seeks to oppose?

Do you think, had choice A read as " The first describes a premise that is accepted as true; the second is a position that is opposed by the argument as a whole", it would have been better?

Please help.

Thanks
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 22 Apr 2026
Posts: 16,439
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 484
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,439
Kudos: 79,390
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
hellosanthosh2k2
VeritasPrepKarishma
Marcab
Recently, motorists have begun purchasing more and more fuel-efficient economy and hybrid cars that consume fewer gallons of gasoline per mile traveled. There has been debate as to whether we can conclude that these purchases will actually lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists. The answer is no, since motorists with more fuel-efficient vehicles are likely to drive more total miles than they did before switching to a more fuel-efficient car, negating the gains from higher fuel-efficiency.

Which of the following best describes the roles of the portions in bold?

1)The first describes a premise that is accepted as true; the second introduces a conclusion that is opposed by the argument as a whole.

2)The first states a position taken by the argument; the second introduces a conclusion that is refuted by additional evidence.

3)The first is evidence that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides information to undermine the force of that evidence.

4)The first is a conclusion that is later shown to be false; the second is the evidence by which that conclusion is proven false.

5)The first is a premise that is later shown to be false; the second is a conclusion that is later shown to be false.

Responding to a pm:

(A) vs (C)

Recently, motorists have begun purchasing more and more fuel-efficient economy and hybrid cars that consume fewer gallons of gasoline per mile traveled. There has been debate as to whether we can conclude that these purchases will actually lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists.
The answer is no, since motorists with more fuel-efficient vehicles are likely to drive more total miles than they did before switching to a more fuel-efficient car, negating the gains from higher fuel-efficiency.

What is the conclusion of this argument?

"These purchases will NOT lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists."

This is the position the argument takes.

So the position that the argument opposes is

"These purchases will actually lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists."

This has been given in our second bold statement: There has been debate as to whether we can conclude that these purchases will actually lead to an overall reduction in the total consumption of gasoline across all motorists.

This statement introduces the opposing conclusion.

(A) The first describes a premise that is accepted as true; the second introduces a conclusion that is opposed by the argument as a whole.

The first bold statement: Recently, motorists have begun purchasing more and more fuel-efficient economy and hybrid cars that consume fewer gallons of gasoline per mile traveled.

This is a premise and has been accepted as true. We know it has been accepted as true since the last line ends with - "...negating the gains from higher fuel-efficiency"
We have seen above that the second bold statement tells us about a conclusion that the argument opposes.

So (A) is correct.

(C)The first is evidence that has been used to support a position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides information to undermine the force of that evidence.

The evidence is "Recently, motorists have begun purchasing more and more fuel-efficient economy and hybrid cars that consume fewer gallons of gasoline per mile traveled."
That is, "the motorists have begun purchasing fuel efficient cars that give better mileage."

The second bold statement does not undermine this evidence at all. In fact, it builds up on it with - will it lead to overall decreased fuel consumption?

Hence (C) is not correct.

Hi Karishma,

Thanks for explanation.
I chose A, but still had some doubts.
the second bold face - a conclusion? - is it not a position that argument as a whole seeks to oppose?

Do you think, had choice A read as " The first describes a premise that is accepted as true; the second is a position that is opposed by the argument as a whole", it would have been better?

Please help.

Thanks

Note that conclusion/position/opinion all are the same as far as we are concerned. The position the author takes is the same as the opinion of the author which is the same as the conclusion of his argument.
User avatar
dcummins
Joined: 14 Feb 2017
Last visit: 16 Mar 2026
Posts: 1,021
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 368
Location: Australia
Concentration: Technology, Strategy
GMAT 1: 560 Q41 V26
GMAT 2: 550 Q43 V23
GMAT 3: 650 Q47 V33
GMAT 4: 650 Q44 V36
GMAT 5: 600 Q38 V35
GMAT 6: 710 Q47 V41
WE:Management Consulting (Consulting)
Products:
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
My approach is to write down BF1/ BF2 then what I think each is before I look at the answers
BF1: Evidence/ Fact/ Premise
BF2: A statement that is opposed later in the argument

Eliminate answers that don't match up with BF1 first
A- Keep
B - Incorrect. First statement is NOT a position, but rather fact.
C - Keep
D - Incorrect. BF1 is NOT a position.
E - Well we can eliminate E for BF1 actually since the premise isn't ever shown to be false

Eliminate remaining answers that don't match with BF2 thoughts
C - The second isn't used to undermine the evidence it is information concerning a position on the evidence itself.

A is correct
avatar
RITESH24
Joined: 15 Jun 2019
Last visit: 24 Jan 2025
Posts: 25
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 56
Location: India
Schools:
GMAT 1: 530 Q44 V19
Schools:
GMAT 1: 530 Q44 V19
Posts: 25
Kudos: 20
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Reasoning given here is implausible for me .... second bold face cannot be conclusion its clearly given that there is a debate as to whether conclude....... so there is a debate its not a conclusion
avatar
Ritesh92gmat
Joined: 26 Jul 2020
Last visit: 13 Jul 2022
Posts: 40
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 175
Location: India
Schools: Rotman '24
GMAT 1: 690 Q51 V34
Schools: Rotman '24
GMAT 1: 690 Q51 V34
Posts: 40
Kudos: 8
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
For those who have confusion between A and C :
1)The first describes a premise that is accepted as true; the second introduces a conclusion that is opposed by the argument as a whole.
[b]As per (A), the second bold "introduces a conclusion ". (A) doesn't say that the second bold is the argument's conclusion.
So, (A) is correct.
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 19,419
Own Kudos:
Posts: 19,419
Kudos: 1,009
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot:

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

This post was generated automatically.
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7391 posts
499 posts
358 posts