Sometime an argument has more than one conclusion. The following is an example:
Because Ming Li went to PekingUniversity, he is smart. Therefore, he is likely to get a high score in GMAT.
The first thing you would notice is that there are two indicators in the above argument – because and therefore. The former leads to a premise and the latter, a conclusion. Secondly, the first sentence is an argument by itself since it contains both a premise (Because Ming Li went to Peking University) and a conclusion (he is smart). Thirdly, the conclusion (he is smart) of the first argument is used to support the second sentence, which is the main conclusion. To put it another way, the clause “he is smart” is both a conclusion (in the 1st sentence) and a premise (in the overall argument.)
In CR tests, a dual-role clause like this is called an “intermediate” or “subsidiary” conclusion. It is not the main point of the overall argument, but it is still a conclusion.
Keep in mind that you have to find the main conclusion of an argument in CR test. Do not be fooled by an intermediate conclusion along the way. Use the “because” test if in doubt.
Some CR questions are not pure arguments. They might also include background information, which, by definition, helps you understand the flow of the argument, but does not contain a premise or a conclusion.
For example, an opinion of a critic or a committee is common in background information:
Editor: Many graduates from Peking University believe they can easily land a white-collar job after graduation. But they are wrong. A survey between 2000 and 2010 shows that more than 10% of Peking University Graduates during the last decade have no job offers within 6 months of their graduation.
The first sentence is neither a premise nor a conclusion. It is the opinion of “many graduates from Peking University.” The editor gives us this opinion to help us understand what he is trying to establish in his own conclusion (in the 2nd sentence) – that these graduates are wrong. In other words, he is arguing that a graduate from Peking University is NOT getting a job offer easily. The editor then buttresses his conclusion by citing a survey as the premise for his main conclusion.
A common pattern for such an argument is:
1) Opinion of someone else
2) The author’s conclusion (usually introduced with words such as but or however to highlight the contrast)
3) Premise(s) to support the author’s conclusion
As to examples of such opinions:
Many scholars believe that . . .
A few committee members argue that . . .
The defendant claimed that . . .
The classical theory holds that . . .
Hui’s recent research found that. . .
Most CDers voted [the posts by Zeros as their favorites]
All the above phrases telegraph to you that someone or some groups or some theories have such opinions or predictions. These phrases often end with the word that, but they do not have to. More often than not, they also start with some qualifiers, such as some, many, most, or all.
After the 1st sentence stating an opinion, the author is probably going to follow up with his or her own conclusion. And the author’s conclusion will usually contradict the opinion stated in the 1st sentence. Accordingly, we can call the 1st opinion “opposing viewpoint.”
Other phrases which introduce opinions of people other than the author are:
It is commonly assumed that . . .
It is very documented that . . .
It is widely agreed that . . .
These phrases are kind of hard to pick up since they do not mention any one person.
In certain arguments, one of the premises might be hidden in unusual places of the argument. Look at the following example:
Ming Li is smarter than Ying Zhang. Therefore, because smarter people earn more money, Ming earns more money than Ying.
The first sentence is a premise. The second sentence put two signal words therefore and because together. As a result, the second premise (smarter people earn more money) is hidden because test takers often treat everything after the indicator therefore as a conclusion.
Whenever the test makers put a premise in the middle of a sentence, they offset it with commas. Everything between the two commas is a premise. Examples are:
Therefore, because premise X, conclusion Y.
Thus, since premise X, conclusion Y.
So, due to premise X, conclusion Y.
Accordingly, given that premise X, conclusion Y.
In all of the above examples, the conclusion introduce by the signal words comes at the very end of the sentence.
To make an argument stronger, a good advocate or debater or writer would concede a weakness of his or her viewpoints to show that they understand the big picture and to preempt a counterargument, if any, from their critics. For example:
Although a very high GPA might not guarantee an offer from a top MBA program, you should aim to get a GPA as high as possible in college if you want to enroll in a MBA program. A high GPA in college is something an admission committee advisor would like to see in the incoming MBA students.
The conclusion (you should aim to get a GPA as high as possible in college) is supported by the premise (A high GPA in college is something an admission committee advisor would like to see in the incoming MBA students.) But as you might have noticed, the first clause (very high GPA might not guarantee an offer from a top MBA program) actually hurts the argument. It is one reason you should NOT aim to get a high GPA in college. The author concedes this point to preempt one objection a critic might raise, such as “a high GPA only indicates book-smart” or “many candidates with high GPA get rejections from top MBA programs.” He is saying “I know high GPA is not sufficient, but it might be necessary. So I still think you should get a high GPA.” This evidence, in his mind, still outweighs the counter evidence a critic might proclaim.
Concessions are often introduced by although, even though, but, however, yet and despite.
新东方在线GMAT频道为大家带来GMAT逻辑题目练习(下)，希望对大家GMAT备考有所帮助。更多精彩尽请关注新东方在线GMAT频道! 6 The
来源 : 网络 2019-09-04 15:17:00 关键字 : GMAT逻辑
新东方在线GMAT频道为大家带来GMAT逻辑题目练习(上)，希望对大家GMAT备考有所帮助。更多精彩尽请关注新东方在线GMAT频道! 1 The