Burton Tool -- Bold Face

[shatabdo.kal]

A prominent investor who holds a large stake in the Burton Tool company has recently claimed that the company is mismanaged, citing as evidence the company's failure to slow production in response to a recent rise in its inventory of finished products. It is doubtful whether an investor's sniping at management can ever be anything other than counterproductive, but in this case it is clearly not justified. It is true that an increased inventory of finished products often indicates that production is outstripping demand, but in Burton's case it indicates no such thing. Rather, the increase in inventory is entirely attributable to products that have already been assigned to orders received from customers.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

A. The first provides evidence to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second states the conclusion.

B.The 1st states the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second states an intermediate conclusion that is drawn in order to support that conclusion

C.The 1st is the position that the argument as a whole opposes;the second provides evidence against the position being opposed.

D.The first states an intermediate conclusion that is drawn in order to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the 2nd states the conclusion of the argument as a whole

E. The 1st & the 2nd both state intermediate conclusions that are drawn in order to support jointly the conclusions of the argument as a whole.

[ps63739]

A. The first provides evidence to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second states the conclusion.
- No evidence is there.

B.The 1st states the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second states an intermediate conclusion that is drawn in order to support that conclusion
- Second is not an intermideate conclusion.
C.The 1st is the position that the argument as a whole opposes;the second provides evidence against the position being opposed.
- The bold lettered supports not opposes the entire structure.
D.The first states an intermediate conclusion that is drawn in order to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the 2nd states the conclusion of the argument as a whole
- 2nd is specific to the company, not as whole.
E. The 1st & the 2nd both state intermediate conclusions that are drawn in order to support jointly the conclusions of the argument as a whole.
Seems right.
Is that the answer?

[chunyang.yu]

B.The 1st states the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second states an intermediate conclusion that is drawn in order to support that conclusion
- Second is not an intermideate conclusion.

E. The 1st & the 2nd both state intermediate conclusions that are drawn in order to support jointly the conclusions of the argument as a whole.
Seems right.

In option B, you said the second bold part is not the intermideate conclusion; while in the option E, you said it is. Seems so controversial.

IMO B.

[ps63739]

B was close. But seeing the sentence it never occured to me that the either of two boldfaces are conclusion of entire argument.

I was wrong. I will keep this in mind.
Thanks.

[RonPurewal]

the answer to this problem should be choice (b). in fact, if you correctly ascertain the structure of the argument, you can come to this conclusion just by looking at what is said about the FIRST boldface in each of the choices, since there is actually just one choice that correctly states the role of the first boldface: the first boldface is the principal conclusion.

these questions are always somewhat difficult, but here is a hint that will help you figure out the structure in this case:

* the passage starts out by quoting someone else (i.e., "a prominent investor").
if a passage starts out by quoting a different person, then the purpose is almost always ultimately to contradict that person's argument.
this is a purely empirical argument from looking at many of the gmat questions, but, upon reflection, it makes sense: if the purpose of the argument is to counter another argument, then some sort of attribution must be given for that argument (even if that attribution is vague, e.g., "some have said..."). by contrast, there is no need to quote an authority for an argument that the passage itself is making, especially given the rather severe constraints on the size of the passage.

--

since the original poster asked no actual question about this problem, i'm not sure what else you are looking for (apart from the correct answer and a very basic explanation).

[kums20]

Dear Ron,
I am bit confused in this question. Burton, a specific company's decision is questioned here. So the ultimate conclusion could be targetting specifically at the company. The first bold face portion, though I understood it as conclusion, I thought it is not the final conclusion. I felt D is more clear.

Your views, please.

[ppenumarti]

Choice B is closest I too would mark as answer. But a dilemma is an incorrect fact in it.
"the second states an intermediate conclusion that is drawn in order to support that conclusion"
Per my understanding, the second does not support the conclusion. It actually contradicts.

[RonPurewal]

Dear Ron,
I am bit confused in this question. Burton, a specific company's decision is questioned here. So the ultimate conclusion could be targetting specifically at the company. The first bold face portion, though I understood it as conclusion, I thought it is not the final conclusion. I felt D is more clear.

Your views, please.

nope. (d) is incorrect.

if you are unsure about which of two statements is the ultimate conclusion, then use the "therefore test":
* try "X; therefore, Y"
* try "Y; therefore, X"
whichever of these make sense is correct, and whatever follows "therefore" is the conclusion.

--

in this case:

in burton's case the increased inventory of finished products does not indicate blah blah blah; THEREFORE, the investor's claim is not justified"
--> this makes sense.


the investor's claim is not justified; THEREFORE, in burton's case the increased inventory of finished products does not indicate blah blah blah"
--> this doesn't make sense.

hence, "the investor's claim is not justified" is the conclusion.

[RonPurewal]

Choice B is closest I too would mark as answer. But a dilemma is an incorrect fact in it.
"the second states an intermediate conclusion that is drawn in order to support that conclusion"
Per my understanding, the second does not support the conclusion. It actually contradicts.

nope.

the investor is claiming that the increased inventory of burton's products indicates a certain thing.

the second boldface says that the increased inventory DOES NOT indicate this thing.
the first boldface says that the investor is incorrect.
these two boldfaces definitely agree with each other.

[kums20]

Dear Ron,
I am bit confused in this question. Burton, a specific company's decision is questioned here. So the ultimate conclusion could be targetting specifically at the company. The first bold face portion, though I understood it as conclusion, I thought it is not the final conclusion. I felt D is more clear.

Your views, please.

nope. (d) is incorrect.

if you are unsure about which of two statements is the ultimate conclusion, then use the "therefore test":
* try "X; therefore, Y"
* try "Y; therefore, X"
whichever of these make sense is correct, and whatever follows "therefore" is the conclusion.

--

in this case:

in burton's case the increased inventory of finished products does not indicate blah blah blah; THEREFORE, the investor's claim is not justified"
--> this makes sense.


the investor's claim is not justified; THEREFORE, in burton's case the increased inventory of finished products does not indicate blah blah blah"
--> this doesn't make sense.

hence, "the investor's claim is not justified" is the conclusion.

Thanks Ron, for spending your time. Now it is clear to me.

[mschwrtz]

You're welcome.

[sudhansu9dm]

Thanks for introducing the "therefore test". It is intuitive and very helpful.

[RonPurewal]

Thanks for introducing the "therefore test". It is intuitive and very helpful.

yeah.

i'm not trying to torture you here, but, if you want extra practice, you can even apply this "therefore test" anytime anyone is ever trying to convince you of anything -- unless the person is talking complete nonsense, the word "therefore" should adequately connect something in the argument to something else.

for instance, a friend from arizona says:
you should move here. the desert is great.

* the desert is great; THEREFORE you should move here --> this makes sense
* you should move here; THEREFORE the desert is great --> this doesn't make sense

etc.

[thanghnvn]

I come up with WORK ORDER for this question type, (from Stacey article on beatthegmat.com)

- purpose: identify 1. what role dose the bold phrases play, and 2. what are bold phrases
- read argument, identify the conclusion of argument.
- identify the relation between bold phrases and the conclusion. label each phrase as: C: conclusion, S supporting conclusion, Neu, neutral, Neg: go again the conclusion
- go to answer choices: eliminate the choices which incorrectly identify the role of the bold phrases.
- when there are 2-3 choices remaining, identify what the bold phrases are correctly..

in above question, we do not have to do the last step.

I find work order effective.

however, bold phrase questions appear at the end of the test and so is for person who want to get 40/51 verbal. I will not focus on this kind of question.

is my thinking correct? Ron, Tim, Manhantan experts, pls, comment.

[RonPurewal]

however, bold phrase questions appear at the end of the test and so is for person who want to get 40/51 verbal. I will not focus on this kind of question.

no.

these questions can appear anywhere on the test, just like any other question type can. it's entirely possible that verbal question #1 could be one of these.