Conformity is dangerous in intellectual endeavors. For instance, one economist pointed out the danger of an inflationary bubble in Nation...

GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions

Source: Mock

Critical Reasoning

Boldface

MEDIUM

...

Notes

Post a Query

Conformity is dangerous in intellectual endeavors. For instance, one economist pointed out the danger of an inflationary bubble in Nation X's housing market prior to a major decline in home prices, but hesitated to express his worries fully because he felt "vulnerable expressing such quirky views," and feared being marginalized. To take another example, consider how it was regarded as "obvious" that at least one hundred genes are needed to convert an animal cell back to its embryonic state. Or at least it was so regarded by almost everyone until the biologist Shinya Yamanaka showed that just four sufficed.

Which of the following most accurately describes the logical roles of the statements in boldface?

The first is a premise meant to support the main conclusion; the second is a statement of the main conclusion.

The first states a possible objection to one of the premises used to support the argument's main conclusion; the second provides an example of a successful prediction used to support the main conclusion.

The first is a premise meant to support the argument's main conclusion; the second addresses an objection to that conclusion.

Both are conclusions that are used as premises to support the argument's main conclusion.

Both provide information intended to support the argument's only conclusion.

Solution

Understanding the Passage

Text from Passage	Analysis
"Conformity is dangerous in intellectual endeavors."	What it says: Following the crowd or going along with popular opinions is harmful when doing intellectual work or research. Visualization: Research Team A follows popular opinion → Gets wrong results. Research Team B thinks independently → Makes breakthrough discoveries. What it does: This establishes the author's main claim that will be supported with examples. Source: Author's view
"For instance, one economist pointed out the danger of an inflationary bubble in Nation X's housing market prior to a major decline in home prices,"	What it says: An economist correctly predicted that house prices would crash before it actually happened. Visualization: 2005: Economist warns "Housing prices will crash from $400K to $200K" → 2006: Prices actually crash from $400K to $200K as predicted. What it does: This begins the first example to support the main claim. Source: Author describing factual events
(Boldface 1) "but hesitated to express his worries fully because he felt 'vulnerable expressing such quirky views,' and feared being marginalized"	What it says: The economist held back from fully sharing his correct prediction because he was afraid others would think his ideas were weird and would exclude him from professional circles. Visualization: Economist thinks: "I predict crash from $400K to $200K but if I say this publicly, 90% of my colleagues will think I'm crazy and I'll lose professional standing." What it does: This shows how conformity pressure prevented the full expression of correct ideas, supporting the author's main claim. Source: Author describing the economist's behavior
"To take another example, consider how it was regarded as 'obvious' that at least one hundred genes are needed to convert an animal cell back to its embryonic state."	What it says: Almost everyone in the scientific community believed it was clearly true that you needed at least 100 genes to turn a regular animal cell back into an embryonic cell. Visualization: Scientific consensus: "Converting cells requires 100+ genes" - believed by 95% of biologists as obvious fact. What it does: This sets up the second example by establishing what the scientific consensus believed. Source: Author describing the scientific community's view
(Boldface 2) "Or at least it was so regarded by almost everyone until the biologist Shinya Yamanaka showed that just four sufficed"	What it says: The scientific consensus was wrong - Yamanaka proved that only 4 genes were actually needed, not 100+. Visualization: Before Yamanaka: 95% of scientists believe "100+ genes needed" → After Yamanaka's research: "Actually only 4 genes needed" - consensus was completely wrong. What it does: This completes the second example by showing how conformity to consensus led to wrong beliefs until one independent thinker proved otherwise. Source: Author describing factual scientific discovery

Overall Structure

The author presents a claim and supports it with two concrete examples showing how conformity pressure harms intellectual progress. The flow moves from general principle to specific supporting evidence.

Main Conclusion: Conformity is dangerous in intellectual endeavors.

Boldface Segments

Boldface 1: but hesitated to express his worries fully because he felt "vulnerable expressing such quirky views," and feared being marginalized
Boldface 2: Or at least it was so regarded by almost everyone until the biologist Shinya Yamanaka showed that just four sufficed

Boldface Understanding

Boldface 1:

Function: Explains how conformity pressure prevented the economist from fully sharing his correct analysis
Direction: Supports the author's conclusion that conformity is dangerous - it shows conformity preventing good ideas from being shared

Boldface 2:

Function: Shows how scientific consensus was proven wrong by an independent thinker
Direction: Supports the author's conclusion that conformity is dangerous - it demonstrates how following the crowd led to incorrect beliefs

Structural Classification

Boldface 1:

Structural Role: Supporting evidence within the first example
Predicted Answer Patterns: "evidence supporting the conclusion," "explanation of how conformity caused harm"

Boldface 2:

Structural Role: Supporting evidence within the second example
Predicted Answer Patterns: "evidence supporting the conclusion," "example of how independent thinking overcame conformity"

Answer Choices Explained

The first is a premise meant to support the main conclusion; the second is a statement of the main conclusion.

"The first is a premise meant to support the main conclusion" - ✓ CORRECT - The first boldface does support the conclusion that conformity is dangerous by showing how conformity pressure prevented full expression of correct ideas
"the second is a statement of the main conclusion" - ✗ WRONG - The second boldface is not the main conclusion. The main conclusion is stated at the very beginning: 'Conformity is dangerous in intellectual endeavors'

"The first states a possible objection to one of the premises" - ✗ WRONG - The first boldface doesn't object to anything; it explains why the economist hesitated, which supports the author's point about conformity being dangerous
"the second provides an example of a successful prediction" - ✗ WRONG - The second boldface describes Yamanaka's discovery, not a prediction. It shows how independent thinking overcame wrong consensus beliefs

The first is a premise meant to support the argument's main conclusion; the second addresses an objection to that conclusion.

"The first is a premise meant to support the argument's main conclusion" - ✓ CORRECT - It does support the conclusion by showing how conformity pressure harmed intellectual expression
"the second addresses an objection to that conclusion" - ✗ WRONG - The second boldface doesn't address an objection; it provides additional evidence supporting the conclusion by showing how consensus was wrong

Both are conclusions that are used as premises to support the argument's main conclusion.

"Both are conclusions that are used as premises" - ✗ WRONG - Neither boldface statement is a conclusion. They are both factual descriptions that serve as supporting evidence within the two examples

Both provide information intended to support the argument's only conclusion.

"Both provide information intended to support the argument's only conclusion" - ✓ CORRECT - Both boldface statements provide supporting evidence for the main conclusion that conformity is dangerous in intellectual endeavors. The first shows how conformity prevented full expression of correct ideas, and the second shows how conformist consensus led to wrong beliefs

Rate this Solution

Tell us what you think about this solution

...

Forum Discussions

Start a new discussion

Post

Previous Attempts

Loading attempts...