Historian: Newton developed mathematical concepts and techniques that are fundamental to modern calculus. Leibniz developed closely analogous concepts...
GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions
Source: Official Guide
...
...
Post a Query
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's 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 portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
Solution
Understanding the Passage
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
| "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's 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" (Boldface 1) "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." |
|
| (Boldface 2) "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" |
|
Overall Structure
The historian presents a debate about whether Leibniz copied from Newton, first showing why some scholars think he did, then providing evidence for why that conclusion is premature.
Main Conclusion: A more cautious conclusion is needed rather than declaring the traditional independence view false.
Boldface Segments
- Boldface 1: the notes were written before Leibniz' own development of calculus concepts and techniques
- Boldface 2: 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
Boldface Understanding
Boldface 1:
- Function: Serves as key evidence supporting the scholars' argument that Leibniz copied from Newton
- Direction: Opposite to author's conclusion (the historian disagrees with using this to make strong claims)
Boldface 2:
- Function: Provides counter-evidence that undermines the scholars' copying argument
- Direction: Same as author's conclusion (supports the historian's call for caution)
Structural Classification
Boldface 1:
- Structural Role: Evidence for a position the author ultimately opposes
- Predicted Answer Patterns: "evidence for a view the author challenges" or "support for a conclusion the author finds premature"
Boldface 2:
- Structural Role: Counter-evidence supporting the author's more cautious position
- Predicted Answer Patterns: "evidence supporting the author's position" or "counter-evidence that supports a more cautious conclusion"
Answer Choices Explained
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.
'The first provides evidence in support of the overall position that the historian defends' - ✗ WRONG - The first boldface actually supports the scholars' position that the historian opposes, not the historian's own position
'the second is evidence that has been used to support an opposing position' - ✗ WRONG - The second boldface is the historian's own counter-evidence, not evidence supporting the opposing scholars' view
'the second is evidence that has been used to support an opposing position' - ✗ WRONG - The second boldface is the historian's own counter-evidence, not evidence supporting the opposing scholars' view
B
The first provides evidence in support of the overall position that the historian defends; the second is that position.
'The first provides evidence in support of the overall position that the historian defends' - ✗ WRONG - Again, the first boldface supports the scholars' copying argument, which the historian disagrees with
'the second is that position' - ✗ WRONG - The second boldface is evidence, not the historian's main conclusion itself
'the second is that position' - ✗ WRONG - The second boldface is evidence, not the historian's main conclusion itself
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.
'The first provides evidence in support of an intermediate conclusion that is drawn to provide support for the overall position that the historian defends' - ✗ WRONG - The first boldface supports the scholars' conclusion that the historian criticizes, not any conclusion supporting the historian's position
'the second provides evidence against that intermediate conclusion' - ✗ WRONG - While the second does provide counter-evidence, the setup is wrong because there's no intermediate conclusion supporting the historian's view
'the second provides evidence against that intermediate conclusion' - ✗ WRONG - While the second does provide counter-evidence, the setup is wrong because there's no intermediate conclusion supporting the historian's view
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.
'The first is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion that the historian criticizes' - ✓ CORRECT - The timing evidence (boldface 1) is used by scholars to conclude copying occurred, which the historian then criticizes as too strong
'the second is evidence offered in support of the historian's own position' - ✓ CORRECT - The information about limited note coverage (boldface 2) directly supports the historian's call for a more cautious conclusion
'the second is evidence offered in support of the historian's own position' - ✓ CORRECT - The information about limited note coverage (boldface 2) directly supports the historian's call for a more cautious conclusion
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.
'The first is evidence that has been used to support a conclusion that the historian criticizes' - ✓ CORRECT - This part accurately describes boldface 1's role
'the second is further information that substantiates that evidence' - ✗ WRONG - The second boldface actually undermines the first evidence rather than substantiating it
'the second is further information that substantiates that evidence' - ✗ WRONG - The second boldface actually undermines the first evidence rather than substantiating it
Rate this Solution
Tell us what you think about this solution
Forum Discussions
Start a new discussion
Post
Load More