Newton and Leibniz

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 116
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:48 pm
Thanked: 3 times

Newton and Leibniz

by neeti2711 » Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:22 am
Historian: Newton developed mathematical concepts and techniques that are fundamental to modern calculus. Leibniz developed closely analogous concepts and techniques. It has traditionally been thought that these discoveries were independent. Researchers have, however, recently discovered notes of Leibniz' that discuss one of Newton's books on mathematics. Several scholars have argued that since the book includes a presentation of Newton's calculus concepts and techniques, and since the notes were written before Leibniz' own development of calculus concepts and techniques, it is virtually certain that the traditional view is false. A more cautious conclusion than this is called for. However, Leibniz' notes are limited to early sections of Newton's book, sections that precede the ones in which Newton's calculus concepts and techniques are presented.

In the historian's reasoning, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

(A) The first provides evidence in support of the overall position that the historian defends; the second is evidence that has been used to support an opposing position

(B) The first provides evidence in support of the overall position that the historian defends; the second is that position

(C) The first provides evidence in support of an intermediate conclusion that is drawn to provide support for the overall position that the historian defends; the second provides evidence against that intermediate conclusion

(D) The first is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion that the historian criticizes; the second is evidence offered in support of the historian's own position

(E) The first is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion that the historian criticizes; the second is further information that substantiates that evidence
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2012 1:50 am

by brainiac » Thu Dec 06, 2012 5:41 am
I think the answer is [C]

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 345
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 10:57 pm
Thanked: 6 times
Followed by:3 members

by himu » Wed Dec 12, 2012 2:05 am
IMO C

OA pls??

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 194
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2012 7:14 pm
Location: India
Thanked: 47 times
Followed by:6 members

by The Iceman » Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:21 pm
The only conclusion or the author's position in this argument is "A more cautious conclusion than this is called for "

The author position favors the traditional view that the two discoveries were independent and criticizes the Scholars' conclusion that traditional view is false.

Both the bolded statements are evidences, of which one supports the scholars' conclusion and the other the author's

Option D captures this best.

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 15
Joined: Mon Nov 26, 2012 1:14 am
Thanked: 1 times

by sri_r » Mon Dec 17, 2012 4:01 am
I think the answer could be option E because it kinds of adds-on to that main evidence(that L's notes contained references from Newton's books) by stating that though there are references about Newton's notes, they weren't complete by themselves so more research would be required to conclude that both the works were independent or not.

There seem to be no word that communicate it as the 'historian's tone'.

Btw does anyone know the OA?
The Iceman wrote:The only conclusion or the author's position in this argument is "A more cautious conclusion than this is called for "

The author position favors the traditional view that the two discoveries were independent and criticizes the Scholars' conclusion that traditional view is false.

Both the bolded statements are evidences, of which one supports the scholars' conclusion and the other the author's

Option D captures this best.