BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

CR - Bold face

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1665
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 7:04 pm
Thanked: 165 times
Followed by:70 members

CR - Bold face

by karthikpandian19 » Sat Jun 30, 2012 3:40 am
Team Doctor: There is an above-average incidence of tendonitis among professional soccer players. The notion that the higher incidence of tendonitis is a result of the physical movements associated with playing soccer is misguided, however; tests have shown that running and kicking do not typically lead to tendonitis. Nevertheless, playing soccer is probably the cause of the high incidence of tendonitis among professional soccer players, though indirectly. These individuals are required to wear shin guards that press against the tendons. It is likely that many professional soccer players wear shin guards more often than is healthy for the tendons of the body, which are easily irritated and inflamed through such strong, consistent pressure.

In the team doctor's reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?


(A) The first introduces the conclusion proposed by the team doctor; the second is a position opposed by the team doctor.

(B) The first is an explanation contradicted by the team doctor; the second is an explanation put forth by the team doctor.

(C) The first is an evidential case advanced in support of a conclusion proposed by the team doctor; the second is that conclusion.

(D) The first introduces the conclusion proposed by the team doctor; the second is a judgment offered in explaining that conclusion.

(E) The first is a generalization put forward by the team doctor; the second presents instances in which that generalization does not hold.
Regards,
Karthik
The source of the questions that i post from JUNE 2013 is from KNEWTON

---If you find my post useful, click "Thank" :) :)---
---Never stop until cracking GMAT---
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 502
Joined: Tue Jun 03, 2008 11:36 pm
Thanked: 99 times
Followed by:21 members

by vk_vinayak » Sat Jun 30, 2012 4:58 am
D. First one is the conclusion, and the second boldface is the support offered for that conclusion.
- VK

I will (Learn. Recognize. Apply)
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 90
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2012 1:27 am
Thanked: 5 times
Followed by:2 members

by sandeep_thaparianz » Sat Jun 30, 2012 5:09 am
d
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 342
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2009 8:50 am
Thanked: 214 times
Followed by:19 members
GMAT Score:740

by Birottam Dutta » Sat Jun 30, 2012 9:01 am
Team Doctor: There is an above-average incidence of tendonitis among professional soccer players. The notion that the higher incidence of tendonitis is a result of the physical movements associated with playing soccer is misguided, however; tests have shown that running and kicking do not typically lead to tendonitis. Nevertheless, playing soccer is probably the cause of the high incidence of tendonitis among professional soccer players, though indirectly. These individuals are required to wear shin guards that press against the tendons. It is likely that many professional soccer players wear shin guards more often than is healthy for the tendons of the body, which are easily irritated and inflamed through such strong, consistent pressure.

In the team doctor's reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?


(A) The first introduces the conclusion proposed by the team doctor; the second is a position opposed by the team doctor. -- The second is not a position opposed by the team doctor.

(B) The first is an explanation contradicted by the team doctor; the second is an explanation put forth by the team doctor. -- The first is not an explanation contradicted by the team doctor.

(C) The first is an evidential case advanced in support of a conclusion proposed by the team doctor; the second is that conclusion. --- The first is not an evidential case.

(D) The first introduces the conclusion proposed by the team doctor; the second is a judgment offered in explaining that conclusion. -- Correct. The first introduces the conclusion that the team doctor supports and the second is a judgement given to support that conclusion.

(E) The first is a generalization put forward by the team doctor; the second presents instances in which that generalization does not hold.---- The second is not an instance when the generalization does not hold.
Top
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 307
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2012 9:45 pm
Thanked: 12 times
GMAT Score:700

by Gaurav 2013-fall » Sun Jul 01, 2012 8:21 am
IMO D
whats OA?
Let me tell you something you already know. The world ain't all sunshine and rainbows. It is a very mean and nasty place and it will beat you to your knees and keep you there permanently if you let it. You, me, or nobody is gonna hit as hard as life. But it ain't how hard you hit; it's about how hard you can get hit, and keep moving forward. How much you can take, and keep moving forward. That's how winning is done. Now, if you know what you're worth, then go out and get what you're worth. But you gotta be willing to take the hit, and not pointing fingers saying you ain't where you are because of him, or her, or anybody. Cowards do that and that ain't you. You're better than that! (Rocky VI)
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1665
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2011 7:04 pm
Thanked: 165 times
Followed by:70 members

by karthikpandian19 » Sun Jul 01, 2012 9:02 pm
OA is D

The question asks about the logical roles of the two boldfaced sentences. The first of the two presents the team doctor's conclusion that soccer is the indirect cause of the tendonitis and the second is a more specific hypothesis, offered to support the conclusion.

Choice D is correct. As demonstrated above, the first statement introduces the conclusion, the second is a judgment helping to explain it.

Choice A is partially correct. While the first boldface portion does introduce the theory, the second is not a position opposed by the team doctor.

Choice B contains a trap. Because the team doctor states earlier in the argument that the physical movements associated with playing soccer have no connection to tendonitis, we might be tempted to conclude that this is, in fact, "an explanation contradicted by the team doctor." The word nevertheless preceding the first boldface statement, however, should make it clear that the doctor does agree with this statement.

Choice C is the correct answer turned backwards; it says that the first section is evidence advanced in support of a conclusion and that the second section is the conclusion. However, the first statement is presented as the doctor's opinion, and as such it is a conclusion, while the second is a hypothesis that the doctor makes to support his conclusion that shin guards and tendonitis are linked.

Choice E is completely off-base. The team doctor does not make any generalizations and there is no reference to any exceptional cases.

Choice D is correct
karthikpandian19 wrote:Team Doctor: There is an above-average incidence of tendonitis among professional soccer players. The notion that the higher incidence of tendonitis is a result of the physical movements associated with playing soccer is misguided, however; tests have shown that running and kicking do not typically lead to tendonitis. Nevertheless, playing soccer is probably the cause of the high incidence of tendonitis among professional soccer players, though indirectly. These individuals are required to wear shin guards that press against the tendons. It is likely that many professional soccer players wear shin guards more often than is healthy for the tendons of the body, which are easily irritated and inflamed through such strong, consistent pressure.

In the team doctor's reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?


(A) The first introduces the conclusion proposed by the team doctor; the second is a position opposed by the team doctor.

(B) The first is an explanation contradicted by the team doctor; the second is an explanation put forth by the team doctor.

(C) The first is an evidential case advanced in support of a conclusion proposed by the team doctor; the second is that conclusion.

(D) The first introduces the conclusion proposed by the team doctor; the second is a judgment offered in explaining that conclusion.

(E) The first is a generalization put forward by the team doctor; the second presents instances in which that generalization does not hold.
Regards,
Karthik
The source of the questions that i post from JUNE 2013 is from KNEWTON

---If you find my post useful, click "Thank" :) :)---
---Never stop until cracking GMAT---
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1