Computer companies whose warranties cover accidental damage, such as a broken screen caused by dropping a laptop, receive three times as many requests for fixing accidental damage as computer companies whose warranties do not cover such damage. It is impractical to track every user in enough detail to determine all factors that contributed to the accidents that caused the damage, so it is true that we cannot determine whether excessive carelessness was a factor. However, these facts are not adequate to prove that two-thirds of such accidents are caused by excessive carelessness, despite what some have claimed. Obviously, when company warranties do not cover accidental damage, customers do not have as much reason to request repairs from the same companies from which they bought their computers.

In the argument above, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A. The first is evidence, the validity of which the argument disputes; the second is a conclusion for which that evidence is offered as support.


B. The first is evidence that supports a position with which the argument agrees; the second is that position.


C. The first is a claim on which a conclusion is based, which the argument supports with additional evidence; the second is the main position that the argument seeks to establish.


D. The first is a finding the interpretation of which is the subject of the argument; the second is a claim disputing the certainty of one possible interpretation.


E. The first is a finding the accuracy of which is in discussion throughout the argument; the second is evidence that supports the accuracy of the finding.


OA D

Source: Princeton Review