Historian: Newton developed mathematical concepts and techniques that

Question

Historian: Newton developed mathematical concepts and techniques that are fundamental to modern calculus. Leibniz developed closely analogous concepts and techniques. It has traditionally been thought that these discoveries were independent. Researchers have, however, recently discovered notes of Leibniz’s that discuss one of Newton’s books on mathematics. Several scholars have argued that since  the book includes a presentation of Newton’s calculus concepts and techniques , and since the notes were written before Leibniz’s own development of calculus concepts and techniques, it is virtually certain  that the traditional view is false . A more cautious conclusion than this is called for, however. Leibniz’s notes are limited to early sections of Newton’s book, sections that precede the ones in which Newton’s calculus concepts and techniques are presented.

In the historian’s reasoning, the two portions in  boldface  play which of the following roles?

(A) The first is a claim that the historian rejects; the second is a position that that claim has been used to support.

(B) The first is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion about which the historian expresses reservations; the second is that conclusion.

(C) The first provides evidence in support of a position that the historian defends; the second is that position.

(D) The first and the second each provide evidence in support of a position that the historian defends.

(E) The first has been used in support of a position that the historian rejects; the second is a conclusion that the historian draws from that position.

Similar Question  :  LINK

Argument Construction

Situation 
A historian discusses a controversy about whether or not Leibniz developed calculus concepts and techniques independently of Newton.

Reasoning 
 What argumentative roles do the two portions in boldface play in the passage?  The first four sentences of the passage simply provide background information. Both boldface sections are within the fifth sentence, which reports an argument by several scholars. The key word  since  indicates that the first boldface section is a premise in the scholars' argument. A second premise preceded by another  since  follows in the next clause. The final clause of the fifth sentence reveals that the second boldface section is the conclusion of the scholars' argument. In the sixth sentence, the historian expresses misgivings about the scholars' conclusion, for reasons presented in the seventh and final sentence.

(A) The historian does not reject the claim that Newton's book includes a presentation of Newton's calculus concepts and techniques. Instead, the historian merely points out that Leibniz's notes do not cover those sections of Newton's book.

(B) Correct . The first boldface section is one of two premises in the scholars' argument, and the second boldface section is that argument's conclusion. In the following sentence the historian expresses reservations about that conclusion.

(C) The historian does not defend the scholars' conclusion but rather expresses misgivings about it.

(D) The second boldface section is the scholars' conclusion and does not present any evidence. Nor does it support the historian's position that a more cautious conclusion is called for.

(E) The second boldface section presents not the historian's conclusion but rather the scholars' conclusion, about which the historian expresses misgivings.

abhimahna · Accepted Answer

First Boldface: Premise to the conclusion of scholars.

Second Boldface: Conclusion of scholars.

Author's Conclusion: Okay, you conclusion may be right but guys let's do a little bit more of research.

(A) The first is a claim that the historian rejects; the second is a position that that claim has been used to support. -->  1st is not the claim. OUT

(B) The first is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion about which the historian expresses reservations; the second is that conclusion.

(C) The first provides evidence in support of a position that the historian defends; the second is that position. -->  Author NEVER said "You guys are wrong" rather he said "Do a little more research Guys".

(D) The first and the second each provide evidence in support of a position that the historian defends. -->  2nd is not the evidence.

(E) The first has been used in support of a position that the historian rejects; the second is a conclusion that the historian draws from that position. -->  2nd is not the conclusion drawn by Historians.

Skywalker18 · Answer

Historian: Newton developed mathematical concepts and techniques that are fundamental to modern calculus. Leibniz developed closely analogous concepts and techniques. It has traditionally been thought that these discoveries were independent. Researchers have, however, recently discovered notes of Leibniz’s that discuss one of Newton’s books on mathematics. Several scholars have argued that since  the book includes a presentation of Newton’s calculus concepts and techniques , and since the notes were written before Leibniz’s own development of calculus concepts and techniques, it is virtually certain  that the traditional view is false . A more cautious conclusion than this is called for, however. Leibniz’s notes are limited to early sections of Newton’s book, sections that precede the ones in which Newton’s calculus concepts and techniques are presented.

BF1 - Premise for scholar's conclusion
BF2- Scholar's conclusion
Main conclusion - More research is needed to determine the validity of BF2

(A) The first is a claim that the historian rejects; the second is a position that that claim has been used to support. - Incorrect - first is not a claim

(B) The first is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion about which the historian expresses reservations; the second is that conclusion. - Correct

(C) The first provides evidence in support of a position that the historian defends; the second is that position. - Incorrect - the author does not defend BF2' position

(D) The first and the second each provide evidence in support of a position that the historian defends. - Incorrect - BF2 is not an evidence

(E) The first has been used in support of a position that the historian rejects; the second is a conclusion that the historian draws from that position. - Incorrect - BF2 is not historian's conclusion

Answer B

aragonn · Answer

Newton developed mathematical concepts and techniques that are fundamental to modern calculus. ---  Fact  
Leibniz developed closely analogous concepts and techniques. ---  Fact 
It has traditionally been thought that these discoveries were independent. ---  opinion/ a conclusion 
Researchers have, however, recently discovered notes of Leibniz’ that discuss one of Newton’s books on mathematics. ---  Fact 
Several scholars have argued that since 1.  , ----  opinion/ supporting above conclusion. 
and since the notes were written before Leibniz’ own development of calculus concepts and techniques,----  fact/evidence/contradicting above conclusion

it is virtually certain that the traditional view is false. ---  main conclusion

A more cautious conclusion than this is called for, however.

Leibniz’ notes are limited to early sections of Newton’s book, sections that precede the ones in which Newton’s calculus concepts and techniques are presented. ---  Fact, evidence for above conclusion
 
 Final verdict - (B) The first is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion about which the historian expresses reservations; the second is that conclusion.

GMATYoda · Answer

Argument Analysis: 
Historian: 1. Newton did X...
2. Leibniz developed something closely analogous to X.
3. Traditional View: Both events 1 and 2 were independent of each other.

Researchers: 
1. Recently discovered notes of Leibniz’s that discuss one of Newton’s books on mathematics.
 Scholar's argument  presents two pieces of evidence to support the conclusion they draw further.
1. Since the book includes a presentation of Newton’s calculus concepts and techniques.
2. Since the notes were written before Leibniz’s own development of calculus concepts and techniques.

Conclusion:  the traditional view is false (traditional view: both events are independent)
Further piece of evidence is provided: Leibniz’s notes are limited to early sections of Newton’s book, sections that precede the ones in which Newton’s calculus concepts and techniques are presented.
In the historian’s reasoning, the two portions in  boldface  play which of the following roles?
 First is not the claim, it is a piece of evidence used to support the final conclusion.
 First is the evidence: YES; Second is the conclusion: YES; seems good on the first read. Let's see what else this option says. Historians express reservations on the final conclusion as they definitely hold to their traditional view. True. This option seems good to be held until a better one appears.
 Historians defend their traditional view, but first provides evidence in support of the conclusion drawn by the scholars. Historians don't defend the second portion of the boldface argument.
 Second is the main conclusion and not the evidence.
 Historian certainly hold reservations of their own, but no where in the argument it says that historians reject that particular position. Second is not the conclusion that historian draw. It's been drawn by the scholars.

Probus · Answer

Hi, lets see how the argument structure is built

Lets Say Historian is the author of this argument , we refer historian as author from now on

Statement 1: Newton developed mathematical concepts and techniques that are fundamental to modern calculus.
Leibniz developed closely analogous concepts and techniques.

The above two statements are facts that the Author Quotes ( We can say this sets the context of the passage)

Statement 2: It has traditionally been thought that these discoveries were independent.

In the Above statement author presents a generally held belief about Statement 1

Statement 3: Researchers have, however, recently discovered notes of Leibniz’s that discuss one of Newton’s books on mathematics.

Author presents yet another fact: The fact is about researchers discovering some thing

Statement 4:  Several scholars have argued that since  the book includes a presentation of Newton’s calculus concepts and techniques , and 
since the notes were written before Leibniz’s own development of calculus concepts and techniques,
it is virtually certain  that the traditional view is false . 
 
  Author says : Based on the findings some researchers have come to certain conclusion ( Researchers are of view that traditional belief is not true)

Statement 5: A more cautious conclusion than this is called for, however.

Author Says: Hey we need to be more careful to draw this conclusion ( Author's View)

Statement 6: Leibniz’s notes are limited to early sections of Newton’s book, sections that precede the ones in which Newton’s calculus concepts and techniques are presented. 
  Author then gives reason why did he say so . In a way he is presenting a reasoning for his view

So we know by now that the author's conclusion is the main conclusion and in re-word the conclusion of author as " It is too much to conclude that Leibniz’s work on calculus was based on Newton’s concepts and techniques on calculus."

So Authors view and researchers view are in opposite direction

Lets Analyze our Bold Face Statements which are in Statement 4:
1st Bold Face in Pink 
What is the role played by the  pink  part in statement 4 :It’s a fact presented by the researchers to conclude that the traditional belief is false
What is the Relation of this part to main conclusion . Since authors view is in opposite to view of researchers , certainly this statement is against the main conclusion.
2nd Bold Face which is in  green  part
What is the role played by this statemnt : Oh this is the conclusion that researchers draw from a fact that they have presented

What is the Relation of this part to main conclusion: As noted above since this is researchers view ( conclusion ) it's against the author's view ( main conclusion of the argument)

So we can Say BF1 and BF2 are in the same direction, but are in opposite direction to the main conclusion of the argument.

best way to understand answer choices is to dissect them into parts and see if we get Yes/ No for each part.

Answer Choices
A  The first is a claim that the historian rejects; the second is a position that that claim has been used to support 
 The first is a claim  : No . It’s a fact used by the researchers to support their conclusion.
 that the historian rejects; : No . The historian (author) does not reject this fact. He rejects the conclusion the researchers draw from this fact .
 the second is a position  :Yes. It is the conclusion made by the researchers so we can call this as position taken by the researchers .
 that that claim has been used to support. : No . Here ' that claim ' refers to BF1 ' . But since we know that BF1 is not a claim .

this choice is incorrect.

Option B:  The first is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion about which the historian expresses reservations; the second is that conclusion

The first is evidence  :Yes. A fact can be called evidence when it is used to support some conclusion 
 that has been used to support a conclusion :Yes. It has been used to support the conclusion made by the researchers.
 about which the historian expresses reservations ;:Yes. the author opposes conclusion drawn by researchers from this fact(evidence)
 the second is that conclusion :Yes. Here that conclusion refers to 'a conclusion' in the first part of answer choice which is is 'the conclusion' drawn by the researchers. ans this conclusion is opposed by author .

B is correct choice.

C:  The first provides evidence in support of a position that the historian defends; the second is that position.  
 The first provides evidence  :Yes. A fact can be called evidence when it is used to support some conclusion
 in support of a position  : Yes. It has been used to support the position( conclusion made by researchers) taken by the researchers
 that the historian defends ;: No.  The author does not agree with the researchers. He rather opposes it.
 the second is that position.  :Yes. here 'that position' refers to 'a position' mentioned in first part of answer choice . Since second BF2 is a potion ( conclusion of researchers) we can say that It is the position taken by the researchers and which the author disagrees  with.
Thus, this is not the correct choice.

D :  The first and the second each provide evidence in support of a position that the historian defends.

The first and the second each provide evidence  :  No.   The BF1 is fact and hence can be called evidence. But BF2 is not a evidence (fact) . BF2 is a claim ( a conclusion) drawn by researchers based on BF1. 
  in support of a position that the historian defends.  : No . Here ' a position' refers to position taken by researchers. Since we know that author disagrees with conclusion drawn by researchers, so this is incorrect

E:  The first has been used in support of a position that the historian rejects; the second is a conclusion that the historian draws from that position

The first has been used in support of a position  : Yes. It’s a fact used by the researchers to support their conclusion or we can say that first is used to support position taken by the researchers. 
  that the historian rejects; : Yes author does not agree with conclusion drawn from this fact and hence opposes researchers position
  the second is a conclusion : Yes Second is 'a conclusion' a conclusion drawn by researchers. 
 that the historian draws from that position. :  No . Second itself is "the position" taken by researchers . And researchers draw this position from a fact mentioned in BF1

this is not the correct choice.

Probus

teaserbae · Answer

nightblade354   gmat1393  
can you please why the first bold face statement is a claim instead of a evidence ?

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Hi  hazelnut

This is real question #64 in OG VR 2016 but the link given, in OG Directory of OG VR 2016 in the place of this question, is Wrong kindly amend it.

Thanks

BillyZ · Answer

Fixed and thanks for notifying me.

saby1410 · Answer

VeritasKarishma   GMATNinja   GMATNinja  Two

can u explain what does it meant to reservations for historians in optiion B

GMATNinja · Answer

To "express reservations" about something means to say that you have some doubts about that thing. One could  express reservations  about entering a den of angry hyenas by saying "Guys, I'm not sure about going in there -- I don't want to get my face ripped off."

(B) states that BF1 "is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion about which the historian expresses reservations." So, does the information in BF1 support a conclusion that the historian  doubts ?

Yes, it does! BF1 is included to support the conclusion of several scholars that "the traditional view is false." The historian then argues  against  this position, saying "a more cautious conclusion than this is called for, however." Here, the historian  expresses reservations  about the scholars' conclusion by telling us that the scholars' conclusion is too bold.

I hope that helps!

prateekchugh · Answer

'reservation' in this option is an expression of doubt by the historians. Historians have a doubt on scholar's conclusion that traditional view, that both are having independent concept, is false. According to Historian, conclusion need to be more cautious.
eg: some generals voiced reservations about making air strikes.

Generals have a doubt about the air strike.

D3N0 · Answer

BF2 is not the main conclusion; it is the conclusion of a few researchers. The Main conclusion comes after this, in the sentence which ends with However. 
And the author disagree with the conclusion presented with BF2

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.

Historian: Newton developed mathematical concepts and techniques that

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

Historian: Newton developed mathematical concepts and techniques that

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