Bold CR-1

This topic has expert replies
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 489
Joined: Tue Jul 05, 2011 11:10 am
Thanked: 28 times
Followed by:5 members

Bold CR-1

by gmatblood » Sat Nov 05, 2011 12:04 pm
Musical composers have generally made their most significant contributions to the musical canon before they reached the age of thirty. It is commonly believed that this is the case because aging brings about a loss of cognitive ability and creative capacity. However, a study pointed out that a disproportionately large number of those composers who made their most significant contributions to the canon after the age of thirty became musicians at an older age than is generally the case. Since by the age of thirty many composers have been engaged as musicians for a decade or more, these findings suggest that the real reason why musicians over thirty rarely make significant contributions to the musical canon is not that they have aged but rather that they have spent too much time as musicians.

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

The first is an explanation that is challenged by the argument; the second is a finding used to support that explanation.

The first is an explanation that the argument opposes; the second is an objection raised against the alternative explanation advocated by the argument.

The first is a claim advanced in support of a position; the second is a finding that clarifies that position.

The first is an explanation advocated by the argument; the second is a finding used to challenge that explanation.

The first is an explanation that the argument challenges; the second is a finding on which that challenge is based.

Why not D!!?
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

User avatar
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2011 11:24 am
Thanked: 1 times
Followed by:5 members

by mir.yahya » Sat Nov 05, 2011 1:40 pm
Well, in the above premise, explanation one is definitely advocating the argument, but i don't see how explanation two is challenging explanation one.

IMO option C

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 5:10 am
Location: Vietnam
Thanked: 10 times
Followed by:5 members

by tuanquang269 » Thu Nov 17, 2011 1:13 am
gmatblood wrote:Musical composers have generally made their most significant contributions to the musical canon before they reached the age of thirty. It is commonly believed that this is the case because aging brings about a loss of cognitive ability and creative capacity. However, a study pointed out that a disproportionately large number of those composers who made their most significant contributions to the canon after the age of thirty became musicians at an older age than is generally the case. Since by the age of thirty many composers have been engaged as musicians for a decade or more, these findings suggest that the real reason why musicians over thirty rarely make significant contributions to the musical canon is not that they have aged but rather that they have spent too much time as musicians.

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

The first is an explanation that is challenged by the argument; the second is a finding used to support that explanation.

The first is an explanation that the argument opposes; the second is an objection raised against the alternative explanation advocated by the argument.

The first is a claim advanced in support of a position; the second is a finding that clarifies that position.

The first is an explanation advocated by the argument; the second is a finding used to challenge that explanation.

The first is an explanation that the argument challenges; the second is a finding on which that challenge is based.

Why not D!!?
IMO E

In A, B, E the first part is OK. D said that the first part is advocated (support) by argument => that really is wrong because this explanation was refuse by 'a study bla bla'.

[spoiler]B's [/spoiler]wrong because the second part do not said about the objection against alternative explanation. (if objection or alternative explanation stand alone, they will be correct)

[spoiler]A's [/spoiler]wrong because second part do not support the first part

Only E is the correct.

C is wrong because the first part is support a position, but after that a study qualify the first boldface by giving another finding (in the second boldface sentence).