Critical Reasoning

OG-12, Q89: 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 describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.

B. The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second states a contrary conclusion that is the main conclusion of the argument.

C. The first provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion.

D. The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seek to explain; the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.

E. The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seek to explain; the second provides evidence in support of the explanation that the argument seek to establish.



The OA is A.However, I chose D. Can anyone please help me in refuting the option that i selected. Obviously the argument seeks to establish the conclusion. The conclusion must be They might well be overoptimistic. And the second bold faced explains why the reasoning may be overoptimistic.

Evidence: several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank
The conclusion is "those worrisome rumors must be false"
Counter: corporate executives have sometimes bought shares in their own company in a calculated attempt to dispel negative rumors about the company’s health

Can u explain in detail why not other options bcoz i chose E

I seek to restart this thread. Source OG 12
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 describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a reason for questioning that support.

B. The first describes evidence that has been taken as supporting a conclusion; the second states a contrary conclusion that is the main conclusion of the argument.

C. The first provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion.

D. The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seek to explain; the second gives the explanation that the argument seeks to establish.

E. The first describes the circumstance that the argument as a whole seek to explain; the second provides evidence in support of the explanation that the argument seek to establish.

OA A.

[spoiler]Stuck btn A & E. [/spoiler]

Even I selected D.

no clue how A can be the answer.

Even I am confused btw A and E.

According to me there are two conclusions, one main and other supporting.
Main conclusion: They might well be overoptimistic.
Supporting Conclusion: those worrisome rumors must be false.

It seems the 2nd bold face supports the main conclusion rather than supporting conclusion.

Can someone please clear this?

received a pm.

Here is the way I attacked this question.

I noticed that the main conclusion appears as the first clause of the last sentence:

They might well be overoptimistic, however

In knew that this is the main conclusion because it macthes my understanding of why the arguer is arguing in the first place--his intent. Also, we have a contrast keyword attached to it ("however"), and in main point and boldface questions, contrast keywords often signal conclusion. Because the word "since" comes right after "however", I knew the second boldface is evidence supporting the author's main conclusion. I then scanned the answer choices looking at only the second clauses, and eliminating any that didn't say "evidence":

Choice A says "gives a reason"---evidence--keep
Choice B says "states a conclusion"--conclusion?!--eliminate
Choice C--eliminate for same reason as choice B
Choice D--"gives an explanation"--an explanation is a type of conclusion, so this choice is saying "gives a conclusion"--eliminate for same reason as choices B and C.
Choice E--"provides evidence"--keep.

So, I was left with choices A and E. Choice E's first clause says the author is explaining the first bold-face. That's not the case. Instead, the author is saying that the first boldface is not sufficient evidence to support a certain conclusion. That is, the author's argument boils down to: "Just because top execs are buing shares doesn't mean the banks are doing well because they might just be buying shares to give the appearance that the banks are doing well."

---

Boldface questions will often involve two points of view: the author's and someone else's or just the author describing two points of view. Use the keywords to understand the structure of the argument. In this argument, we had:

"THEY reason that since top execs.....They are HOWEVER optimistic".

Testluv wrote:received a pm.


Choice D--"gives an explanation"--an explanation is a type of conclusion, so this choice is saying "gives a conclusion"--eliminate for same reason as choices B and C.
.

Mr/Ms Testluve, i don't see an explanation is a type of conclusion, could you explain this concretely?

bvn wrote:

Testluv wrote:received a pm.


Choice D--"gives an explanation"--an explanation is a type of conclusion, so this choice is saying "gives a conclusion"--eliminate for same reason as choices B and C.
.

Mr/Ms Testluve, i don't see an explanation is a type of conclusion, could you explain this concretely?

Hi bvn,

there are six types of conclusions (the list is mutually exhaustive but not mutually exclusve--conclusion types may overlap):

--recommendations
--value judgments
--condtional statements
--comparisons
--predictions
--assertions of fact

When an author advances an explanation for a phenomenon as in "X explains Y" (or "X causes Y"), the author is asserting(what he thinks to be) a fact--sixth type of conclusion in the list above.

Thank you very much. Now i know what should i need to add to my consideration

Be careful with " a conclusion", which does not mean main conclusion of the passage. So A can not be eliminated !

IMO A is the answer.

I dont agree that the conclusion mentioned above is true...becoz if it was true then in choice A ..second boldfaced stmt should be "the second gives a reason for questioning that support." and shud rather be something like supporting the conclusion.

IMO conclusion is depositors are greatly relieved by the bank's move
hence now A makes sense in totality

Hi TestLuv you said

Choice E's first clause says the author is explaining the first bold-face.

First Clause in Choice E describes the role that the 1st Boldface is Playing
In this context if we consider the quoted portion above , it says that " In the 1st Boldface ,the author is explaining the first Boldface "
How can a boldface statement explain itself .


The argument is trying to explain why several of a bank's top executives have been buying shares in their own bank , which is precisely what the first boldface describes . Then Why E wrong in light of this interpretation .

I am still finding it hard to understand A
The argument is trying to explain the reason for the 1st Boldface . The evidence is "since top executives evidently have faith in the bank's financial soundness, those worrisome rumors must be false."How is the 1st Boldface an evidence .

Apparently the right Q in OG is


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
fi nancial collapse, have been greatly relieved. They
reason that, since top executives evidently have faith
in the bank's fi nancial soundness, those worrisome
rumors must be false. Such reasoning might well be
overoptimistic, however, since corporate executives
have been known to buy 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 fi rst describes evidence that has been taken
as supporting a conclusion; the second gives a
reason for questioning that support.
(B) The fi rst describes evidence that has been taken
as supporting a conclusion; the second states a
contrary conclusion that is the main conclusion
of the argument.
(C) The fi rst provides evidence in support of the
main conclusion of the argument; the second
states that conclusion.
(D) The fi rst describes the circumstance that the
argument as a whole seeks to explain; the
second gives the explanation that the argument
seeks to establish.
(E) The fi rst describes the circumstance that the
argument as a whole seeks to explain; the
second provides evidence in support of the
explanation that the argument seeks to
establish.


As you can see, it says executives are known to buy. . how can this be an evidence.. this is just an explanation.. so D must be right..