Critical Reasoning

Since it has become known that several of a bank’s top executives have been buying shares in their own bank, the bank’s depositors, who had been worried by rumors that the bank faced impending financial collapse, have been greatly relieved. They reason that since top executives evidently have faith in the bank’s financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false. They might well be overoptimistic, however since corporate executives have sometimes bought shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company’s health.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

A. The first summarizes the evidence used in the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second states the counterevidence on which the argument relies.
B. The first summarizes the evidence used in the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second is an intermediate conclusion supported by the evidence.
C. The first is an intermediate conclusion that forms part of the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second is evidence that undermines the support for this intermediate conclusion.
D. The first is an intermediate conclusion that forms part of the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second is the main conclusion of the argument.
E. The first is an intermediate conclusion that forms part of the reasoning called into question by the argument; the second states a further conclusion supported by this intermediate conclusion.

I am confused with the answer

imo:D

C, D, or E, and I choose D

First can't be conclusion.
IMO A

IMO B

They reason that since top executives evidently have faith in the bank’s financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false.

The word "since" triggers tht the 1st bold part is a reasoning/explanation drawn to support the conclusion. And "those worrisome rumors must be false" is that conclusion, which the argument calls into question.

As such, the first part cannot be the conclusion, hence C, D and E out !

Between A and B,

The 2nd bold part is definitely not an evidence, it can either be a conclusion or a judgement. So I go with B.

The above is what I feel. Please share your opinion.

IMO: B, second is the main conclusion

Conclusion : banks employess have been greatly relieved

Reason or intermediate conclusion : They reason that since top executives evidently have faith in the bank’s financial soundness,

They might well be overoptimistic: This is undermining the reasoning mentioned above.


IMO : C

Please correct me if iam wrong.

I am going with D. What is the OA?

I think it should be C.

First is the intermediate conclusion, second is what undermines it.

Can you post the OA answer please?

-A

IMO B

as first is not a conclusion.. It is an evidence
and second part is a conclusion...

which is satisfied in B only

I am too with B.

The first bold is an argument to the conclusion that those rumours were false. And second bold is an conclusion.

So, B.

what's the OA?

hi anna its vishal here....

the last 3 are definitely not there as the 1st statement is not intermediate conclusion. I am confused between A and B, but i feel its B...let me know....

imo B

IMO: A