Scientists typically do their most creative work before the age of forty. It is commonly thought that this happens because...

GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions

Source: Official Guide

Critical Reasoning

Boldface

MEDIUM

...

Notes

Post a Query

Scientists typically do their most creative work before the age of forty. It is commonly thought that this happens because aging by itself brings about a loss of creative capacity. However, studies show that a disproportionately large number of the scientists who produce highly creative work beyond the age of forty entered their field at an older age than is usual. Since by the age of forty the large majority of scientists have been working in their field for at least fifteen years, the studies' finding strongly suggests that the real reason why scientists over forty rarely produce highly creative work is not that they have simply aged but rather that they generally have spent too long in a given field.

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

The first is the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second is an objection that has been raised against a position defended in the argument.

the first is a claim that has been advanced in support of a position that the argument opposes; the second is a finding that has been used in support of that position.

The first is an explanation that the argument challenges; the second is a finding that has been used in support of that explanation.

The first is an explanation that the argument challenges; the second is a finding on which that challenge is based.

The first is an explanation that the argument defends; the second is a finding that has been used to challenge that explanation.

Solution

Understanding the Passage

Text from Passage	Analysis
"Scientists typically do their most creative work before the age of forty."	What it says: Most scientists produce their best, most innovative research when they are under 40 years old. Visualization: Creative output timeline: Age 25-39: Peak creativity period → Age 40+: Declining creativity What it does: Establishes the basic observation that needs explanation Source: Author presenting a generally accepted fact
(Boldface 1) "aging by itself brings about a loss of creative capacity"	What it says: The common belief is that getting older directly causes people to become less creative - that age itself is the problem. Visualization: Age progression: 25 years old: High creativity → 35 years old: Medium creativity → 45 years old: Low creativity (due to aging process) What it does: Presents the conventional explanation that the author will challenge Source: Others' commonly held view
"However, studies show that"	What it says: The author is about to present research findings that contradict the common belief. Visualization: Research evidence coming that opposes the aging theory What it does: Signals a shift to evidence that will challenge the conventional view Source: Author introducing contradictory evidence
(Boldface 2) "a disproportionately large number of the scientists who produce highly creative work beyond the age of forty entered their field at an older age than is usual."	What it says: Among scientists over 40 who are still highly creative, most started their careers later than typical. Instead of starting at age 25, they might have started at age 35. Visualization: Creative scientists over 40: 70% started careers at age 35+ vs. Typical scientists: 80% started careers at age 25 What it does: Provides key evidence that challenges the aging explanation Source: Author presenting study findings
"Since by the age of forty the large majority of scientists have been working in their field for at least fifteen years"	What it says: Most scientists who are 40 have been doing the same type of work for 15+ years (started around age 25). Visualization: Typical scientist timeline: Age 25: Start career → Age 40: 15 years in same field What it does: Provides context to interpret the study findings Source: Author providing background information
"the studies' finding strongly suggests that the real reason why scientists over forty rarely produce highly creative work is not that they have simply aged but rather that they generally have spent too long in a given field."	What it says: The author concludes that scientists over 40 aren't creative not because they're older, but because they've been working in the same area for too many years and become stale. Visualization: Real cause: 15+ years in same field → Mental staleness vs. False cause: Age 40+ → Biological decline What it does: States the author's main conclusion that rejects the aging theory Source: Author's conclusion

Overall Structure

The author presents a commonly held belief about aging and creativity, then uses research evidence to argue that this belief is wrong. The real problem isn't age itself but spending too long in one field.

Main Conclusion: Scientists over 40 rarely produce creative work not because of aging, but because they have typically spent too long working in the same field.

Boldface Segments

Boldface 1: aging by itself brings about a loss of creative capacity
Boldface 2: a disproportionately large number of the scientists who produce highly creative work beyond the age of forty entered their field at an older age than is usual

Boldface Understanding

Boldface 1 Analysis:

Function: Presents the conventional explanation for why older scientists aren't creative
Direction: Opposite to author's conclusion (the author argues this view is wrong)

Boldface 2 Analysis:

Function: Provides the key research evidence that supports the author's alternative explanation
Direction: Same as author's conclusion (supports the author's argument)

Structural Classification

Boldface 1:

Structural Role: Conventional view that the author opposes
Predicted Answer Patterns: "view that the author disputes," "explanation that the argument challenges"

Boldface 2:

Structural Role: Evidence supporting the author's alternative conclusion
Predicted Answer Patterns: "evidence supporting the author's conclusion," "finding that supports the argument's main point"

Answer Choices Explained

The first is the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second is an objection that has been raised against a position defended in the argument.

'The first is the position that the argument as a whole opposes' - ✓ CORRECT - The aging explanation is what the author argues against
'the second is an objection that has been raised against a position defended in the argument' - ✗ WRONG - The second boldface actually supports the author's position, it's not an objection against it

the first is a claim that has been advanced in support of a position that the argument opposes; the second is a finding that has been used in support of that position.

'the first is a claim that has been advanced in support of a position that the argument opposes' - ✗ WRONG - While the first is a position the argument opposes, it's not described as a 'claim advanced in support' but rather as the position itself
'the second is a finding that has been used in support of that position' - ✗ WRONG - The second boldface actually contradicts and undermines the aging explanation, not supports it

The first is an explanation that the argument challenges; the second is a finding that has been used in support of that explanation.

'The first is an explanation that the argument challenges' - ✓ CORRECT - The aging theory is indeed challenged by the author
'the second is a finding that has been used in support of that explanation' - ✗ WRONG - The study finding actually works against the aging explanation, not in support of it

The first is an explanation that the argument challenges; the second is a finding on which that challenge is based.

'The first is an explanation that the argument challenges' - ✓ CORRECT - The author disputes the aging explanation
'the second is a finding on which that challenge is based' - ✓ CORRECT - The study about late-entry scientists is the key evidence the author uses to challenge the aging theory

The first is an explanation that the argument defends; the second is a finding that has been used to challenge that explanation.

'The first is an explanation that the argument defends' - ✗ WRONG - The author actually opposes the aging explanation, not defends it
'the second is a finding that has been used to challenge that explanation' - ✓ CORRECT - The study does challenge the aging explanation, but since the first part is wrong, this choice is incorrect

Rate this Solution

Tell us what you think about this solution

...

Forum Discussions

Start a new discussion

Post

Previous Attempts

Loading attempts...