Critical Reasoning

Antonio: Although many attorneys stress the importance of writing a will to govern the distribution of one's property upon death, most people would be better off not drafting a will. Intestacy laws govern the disposition of the estates, the financial assets and personal belongings, of people who die without wills. These laws generally divide the deceased's assets among the surviving spouse and children, if any. Because most people would choose a similar division of property if they drafted wills, they should avoid the expense of hiring an attorney to draft a will.

Beatrice: But the distribution of assets is not the only function handled by a will. The document also determines the guardianship of minor children if both parents are dead. Thus, a will can serve a useful purpose even if the distribution of assets would be the same as that under intestacy laws.

Which of the following best describes the roles played by the bolded phrases in the discussion above?



A.The first phrase states an exception to a general principle, and the second restates that principle.

B.The first phrase states a position, and the second provides evidence supporting an alternate position.

C.The first phrase presents factual evidence, and the second disputes the accuracy of that evidence.

D.The first phrase states the conclusion of an argument, and the second contradicts a premise upon which the conclusion is based.

E.The first phrase contradicts generally accepted beliefs, and the second describes a specific example of those beliefs.

Okay i narrowed to B and D ...what next???

would go with D.
Antonio's position: will is useless as division of property as per intestacy laws not very different from division as per will. assumption: division of property is the ony purpose of a will

Beatrice's position: division of property is not the only use of a will, it is also a document of guardianship.


B is out as no conclusion or position is given by the 2nd bf, it only contradicts the unstated premise of the position/conclusion of the 1st bf

I would go with D. It is more specific and accurate than choice B.

B is not wrong, but is vague. D hits them spot on and hence is the corect answer.

You might want to re-consider B

scoobydooby wrote:would go with D.
Antonio's position: will is useless as division of property as per intestacy laws not very different from division as per will. assumption: division of property is the ony purpose of a will

Beatrice's position: division of property is not the only use of a will, it is also a document of guardianship.


B is out as no conclusion or position is given by the 2nd bf, it only contradicts the unstated premise of the position/conclusion of the 1st bf

OA B

now think why ???

bhumika.k.shah wrote:OA B

now think why ???

i think i got it now .. i think D is wrong because the second statement doesn't contradict the premise but instead adds new information which contradicts the conclusion. correct? or is my reasoning flawed?

U got it!
how to solve such boldfaced questions!
they are really difficult @ times ;-(

sars72 wrote:

bhumika.k.shah wrote:OA B

now think why ???

i think i got it now .. i think D is wrong because the second statement doesn't contradict the premise but instead adds new information which contradicts the conclusion. correct? or is my reasoning flawed?

Agree with Sars' reasoning. The second portion of D is not reflected in the stimulus.