Technology Analyst: Most technologies become less effective

Question

Technology Analyst:  Most technologies become less effective over time.  Some experts go so far as to recommend that every technology will be redundant after 15 years and should be replaced by a new technology, thus replacing all of its existing infrastructure and personnel. However, this policy would be impractical since  certain technologies have trivial applications, such as in motor operated equipment used in households and, and therefore cannot afford to be permanently discontinued.

In the technology analyst’s argument above, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A) The first is evidence offered in support of an opinion that the technology analyst rejects; the second offers information that contradicts that evidence.

B) The first is a premise that the technology analyst accepts but argues against; the second offers evidence that supports the analyst’s position.

C) The first is a position that the technology analyst argues against; the second is the position that the analyst defends.

D) The first is a generalization that the technology analyst accepts as accurate and is used as the basis for an opinion that the analyst rejects; the second is a consideration used to defend the analyst’s position.

E) The first is a generalization that the technology analyst accepts as accurate and is used as the basis for the analyst’s position; the second offers another consideration used to defend that position.

Vercules · Accepted Answer

Technology Analyst:  Most technologies become less effective over time.  Some experts go so far as to recommend that every technology will be redundant after 15 years and should be replaced by a new technology, thus replacing all of its existing infrastructure and personnel. However, this policy would be impractical since  certain technologies have trivial applications, such as in motor operated equipment used in households and, and therefore cannot afford to be permanently discontinued.

In the technology analyst’s argument above, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

The conclusion of the technology analyst is that the experts' recommendation is impractical. The first bold-faced statement, the generalization that technologies become less effective over time, is used as evidence to support the experts' position. The second bold-faced statement is used to defend the technology analyst's position.

A) The first is evidence offered in support of an opinion that the technology analyst rejects; the second offers information that contradicts that evidence.

The first part of this choice is correct the second is not. The second bold-faced statement does not contradict the premise that technologies lose their effectiveness over time.

B) The first is a premise that the technology analyst accepts but argues against; the second offers evidence that supports the analyst’s position.

This choice correctly states that the second bold-faced statement offers evidence in support of the technology analyst's position. It is true that the first bold-faced statement is a premise that the technology analyst accepts but, she does not argue against this premise; instead, the analyst argues against the experts' position, which is based on this premise.

C) The first is a position that the technology analyst argues against; the second is the position that the analyst defends.

The first bold-faced statement is not a position that the technology analyst argues against. The first bold-faced statement is one that the analyst accepts as true. Furthermore, the second bold-faced statement is not the technology analyst's position; it is the evidence offered in support of the analyst's position.

D) The first is a generalization that the technology analyst accepts as accurate and is used as the basis for an opinion that the analyst rejects; the second is a consideration used to defend the analyst’s position.

Correct. The first bold-faced statement, the fact that technologies become less effective over time, is accepted by the technology analyst as true and yet is used as evidence to support the experts' position, which the technology analyst rejects. The second bold-faced statement is used to defend the analyst's position.

E) The first is a generalization that the technology analyst accepts as accurate and is used as the basis for the analyst’s position; the second offers another consideration used to defend that position.

This choice correctly states that the second bold-faced statement offers a consideration in support of the technology analyst's position. It is also true that the first bold-faced statement is a generalization that the technology analyst accepts as accurate but, the first bold-faced statement is not used as the basis for the analyst's position; it is used as the basis for the experts' position.

Transcendentalist · Answer

I pick d. As technology being less effective is a generalization that the analyst agrees with but rejects the opinion of certain experts based on this generalization since this is impractical. He then goes on to explain his position by using the household technology example

marcovg4 · Answer

For me its D.

The problem I see with choice B is that the analyst accepts the generalization, which is ok, but he argues against the experts opinion, not the generalization that most techonologies become obsolate over time.

Whats the OA?

ratinarace · Answer

For me it is between B and D... below should be the tie breaker.
1) the description of 1 bold faced part is crispier in D
2) the second bold part qualifies more as a  consideration  than as an  evidence

So  D  for me

akhil911 · Answer

Let us first break the argument - what is the conclusion and what role do the two bold face sentences play with respect to the conclusion.

BF1 - Most technologies become less effective over time
This could be considered an intermediate conclusion and a premise on which the author makes the statement that some people believe that in 15 years time technology becomes obsolete. This statement is clearly a premise on which a statement is made which is against the conclusion of the argument.

Conclusion - However, this policy would be impractical - that every technology would become obsolete after 15 years.

BF2 - certain technologies have trivial applications, such as in motor operated equipment used in households and, and therefore cannot afford to be permanently discontinued.
BF2 is giving reason as to why the conclusion above stands. It is supporting the conclusion.

Hence after doing such analysis upfront we go to the individual answer choices and then make our decision.

A) The first is evidence offered in support of an opinion that the technology analyst rejects; the second offers information that contradicts that evidence.
The first statement is not any kind of evidence , its just an opinion. 
B) The first is a premise that the technology analyst accepts but argues against; the second offers evidence that supports the analyst’s position.
The first statement is a premise but the author does not argue against this premise. He argues against the next statement that is based on this premise.
C) The first is a position that the technology analyst argues against; the second is the position that the analyst defends.
The second is not a position but a reason as to why the conclusion holds.
D) The first is a generalization that the technology analyst accepts as accurate and is used as the basis for an opinion that the analyst rejects; the second is a consideration used to defend the analyst’s position.
Right on mark from our pre-thinking step.
E) The first is a generalization that the technology analyst accepts as accurate and is used as the basis for the analyst’s position; the second offers another consideration used to defend that position.
The first is a generalization that the technology analyst accepts as accurate but this is not used for basis for the analysts position , in facts its going against the conclusion ( that is the analyst argument).

Kudos me if you like the post !!!!

Crytiocanalyst · Answer

A) The first is evidence offered in support of an opinion that the technology analyst rejects; the second offers information that contradicts that evidence.
 The evidence was never condradictory but rather in support of the authors argument

B) The first is a premise that the technology analyst accepts but argues against; the second offers evidence that supports the analyst’s position.
 The suthor was never arguing against the same but rather pointing out another possiblity that cannot be ruked out

C) The first is a position that the technology analyst argues against; the second is the position that the analyst defends.
 The author accepts the accuracy of the first staement

D) The first is a generalization that the technology analyst accepts as accurate and is used as the basis for an opinion that the analyst rejects; the second is a consideration used to defend the analyst’s position.
 exactly this nails the reasoning the author wants to convey

E) The first is a generalization that the technology analyst accepts as accurate and is used as the basis for the analyst’s position; the second offers another consideration used to defend that position
 This position was not soley based on the the initial evidence  
Hence IMO D

VerbalBot · Answer

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.

Technology Analyst: Most technologies become less effective

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

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Technology Analyst: Most technologies become less effective

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

My Rewards