Certainly, pesticides can adversely affect the environment in localities distant from where the pesticide has actually been used. Nevertheless, regula...

GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions

Source: Official Guide

Critical Reasoning

Boldface

MEDIUM

...

Notes

Post a Query

Certainly, pesticides can adversely affect the environment in localities distant from where the pesticide has actually been used. Nevertheless, regulation of pesticide use should not take place at the national level but at the local level. It is in the areas where pesticides are actually applied that they have their most serious effects. Just how serious these effects are depends on local conditions such as climate, soil type, and water supply. And local officials are much more likely than national legislators to be truly knowledgeable about such local conditions.

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

The first provides support for the conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion.

The first states the conclusion of the argument; the second provides support for that conclusion.

The first identifies grounds for a potential objection to the conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion.

The first identifies grounds for a potential objection to the conclusion of the argument; the second provides support for that conclusion.

Each provides support for the conclusion of the argument.

Solution

Understanding the Passage

Text from Passage	Analysis
(Boldface 1) "Certainly, pesticides can adversely affect the environment in localities distant from where the pesticide has actually been used."	What it says: The author acknowledges that pesticides can cause environmental damage even in places far away from where they were originally applied Visualization: Farm in Iowa uses pesticides → Environmental damage occurs 500 miles away in Minnesota lakes and forests What it does: This establishes a concession - admitting a point that might seem to support national regulation Source: Author's view (acknowledging a fact)
"Nevertheless, regulation of pesticide use should not take place at the national level but at the local level."	What it says: Despite the previous point, the author argues that pesticide regulation should be handled by local authorities, not national government Visualization: Current: Federal EPA regulates all pesticides → Proposed: Local county boards regulate pesticides in their areas What it does: This presents the main conclusion, using "Nevertheless" to contrast with the previous concession Source: Author's view (main position)
(Boldface 2) "It is in the areas where pesticides are actually applied that they have their most serious effects."	What it says: The most severe environmental damage from pesticides happens in the specific locations where the pesticides are actually used, not in distant areas Visualization: Pesticide application site: 90% of environmental damage → Distant locations: 10% of environmental damage What it does: This provides the key reason supporting local regulation by emphasizing where the worst effects occur Source: Author's view (supporting evidence)
"Just how serious these effects are depends on local conditions such as climate, soil type, and water supply."	What it says: The severity of pesticide effects varies based on specific local environmental factors Visualization: Desert area with clay soil: 20% damage → Wetland area with sandy soil: 80% damage What it does: This further supports the local regulation argument by showing the need for local knowledge Source: Author's view (additional supporting evidence)
"And local officials are much more likely than national legislators to be truly knowledgeable about such local conditions."	What it says: Local government officials have better understanding of their area's environmental conditions compared to national politicians Visualization: Local official knows soil composition, rainfall patterns → National legislator knows general statistics but lacks specific area knowledge What it does: This completes the argument by showing why local regulation is more effective Source: Author's view (final supporting point)

Overall Structure

The author presents an argument advocating for local rather than national pesticide regulation. The flow follows a "concession then rebuttal" pattern where the author acknowledges a point favoring national regulation but then provides stronger reasons for local regulation.

Main Conclusion: Regulation of pesticide use should take place at the local level, not the national level.

Boldface Segments

Boldface 1: pesticides can adversely affect the environment in localities distant from where the pesticide has actually been used
Boldface 2: It is in the areas where pesticides are actually applied that they have their most serious effects

Boldface Understanding

Boldface 1:

Function: This serves as a concession that acknowledges a fact which might support the opposing view (national regulation)
Direction: Opposite direction - it presents information that could be used to argue against the author's conclusion

Boldface 2:

Function: This provides the primary evidence supporting the author's main conclusion
Direction: Same direction - it directly supports the author's position that local regulation is better

Structural Classification

Boldface 1:

Structural Role: Concession/Counterpoint - acknowledges opposing evidence
Predicted Answer Patterns: "acknowledges a consideration that weighs against", "concedes a point that might support the opposing view"

Boldface 2:

Structural Role: Primary supporting evidence for the main conclusion
Predicted Answer Patterns: "provides evidence in support of", "offers a reason for the conclusion"

Answer Choices Explained

The first provides support for the conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion.

'The first provides support for the conclusion of the argument' - ✓ CORRECT - Boldface 1 acknowledges distant effects as part of the author's argument strategy
'the second states that conclusion' - ✗ WRONG - Boldface 2 doesn't state the conclusion; it provides evidence for it. The actual conclusion is about local vs. national regulation

The first states the conclusion of the argument; the second provides support for that conclusion.

'The first states the conclusion of the argument' - ✗ WRONG - Boldface 1 is about distant environmental effects, not about regulatory jurisdiction
'the second provides support for that conclusion' - ✓ CORRECT - Boldface 2 does support the conclusion by emphasizing local effects

The first identifies grounds for a potential objection to the conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion.

'The first identifies grounds for a potential objection to the conclusion of the argument' - ✗ WRONG - This mischaracterizes Boldface 1's role in the argument
'the second states that conclusion' - ✗ WRONG - Boldface 2 provides support for the conclusion rather than stating it directly

The first identifies grounds for a potential objection to the conclusion of the argument; the second provides support for that conclusion.

'The first identifies grounds for a potential objection to the conclusion of the argument' - ✗ WRONG - This misinterprets how Boldface 1 functions in the argument
'the second provides support for that conclusion' - ✓ CORRECT - By emphasizing that worst effects are local, it supports local regulation

Each provides support for the conclusion of the argument.

'Each provides support for the conclusion of the argument' - ✓ CORRECT - Both boldface statements, despite appearing to point in different directions, actually work together to support the author's conclusion for local regulation

Rate this Solution

Tell us what you think about this solution

...

Forum Discussions

Start a new discussion

Post

Previous Attempts

Loading attempts...