Timer
00:00
Your answer
Difficulty–
right wrong
Pick an answer to see how members did
8question types
Log this miss in the free GMAT error log
Get the error log60days
Get one like this every day: the free 60-day plan
Start the planPublic health expert: Increasing the urgency of a public health message may be counterproductive. In addition to irritating the majority who already behave responsibly, It may undermine all government pronouncements on health by convincing people that such messages are overly cautious. And there is no reason to believe that those who ignore measured voices will listen to shouting. The two sections in boldface play which of the following roles in the public health expert's argument?
(A) The �rst is a conclusion for which support is provided. but is not the argument's main conclusion; the
second is an unsupported premise supporting the arguments main conclusion.
(B) The �rst is a premise supporting the only explicit conclusion; so is the second.
(C) The �rst is the argument's main conclusion; the second supports that conclusion and is itself a conclusion
for which support is provided.
(D) The �rst is a premise supporting the argument's only conclusion; the second is that conclusion.
(E) The �rst is the argument‘s only explicit conclusion; the second is a premise supporting that conclusion.
OA = E
Why is C wrong? Isn't the second part a subconclusion for which we can say support is provided in terms of 'by convincing people that such messages are overly cautious"?
(A) The �rst is a conclusion for which support is provided. but is not the argument's main conclusion; the
second is an unsupported premise supporting the arguments main conclusion.
(B) The �rst is a premise supporting the only explicit conclusion; so is the second.
(C) The �rst is the argument's main conclusion; the second supports that conclusion and is itself a conclusion
for which support is provided.
(D) The �rst is a premise supporting the argument's only conclusion; the second is that conclusion.
(E) The �rst is the argument‘s only explicit conclusion; the second is a premise supporting that conclusion.
OA = E
Why is C wrong? Isn't the second part a subconclusion for which we can say support is provided in terms of 'by convincing people that such messages are overly cautious"?
