Hi All,
I am scheduled to take the GMAT this coming Monday (like three days), and I'm covering my weaknesses in these final days. As the subject line indicates, one of my weaknesses is "Boldfaced Type Questions", particularly questions that include two conclusions in the statement.
Ultimately, my question is this: What is the most efficient and effective way to identify which is the main conclusion and which is the secondary conclusion in the statements when two conclusions are present?
Please let me know this and any other helpful information for solving these question types and I would be truly appreciative!
Matt
______________________
It's game time.
GMAT Forum
2 postsPage 1 of 1
- ketron.matthew
- Students
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2013 3:42 am
- RonPurewal
- Students
- Posts: 19744
- Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:23 am
Re: Boldfaced Type Questions
I wouldn't even worry about sticking such labels on things. The answer choices are not ever going to call anything a "secondary conclusion" -- so, even if you succeed in sticking that label on something, you'll still have more work to do before your response conforms to any of the answer choices.
Instead, just be as specific as possible about the interaction between these conclusions. (Note -- interaction. The statements are meaningless by themselves; they are only significant in relation to each other.)
E.g.,
... is the first one someone else's point, which the speaker then debunks/counter-argues/weakens with the second one?
... is the first one something that the speaker then uses as a reason for the second one?
... is the first one something that people once thought was true, but now those people believe the second one?
... is the first one the motivation behind some action, and the second one the effect that the speaker thinks the action will actually have?
Etc.
Two advantages here.
1/
This is way easier, because it's a normal human thought process. (Labeling things as "secondary conclusions" is much less normal on planet earth.)
2/
The things you come up with here will be what the answer choices actually say.
E.g., in my first example above, the correct answer would say that the first one is "a position that the argument challenges". In the second one, "a claim that is used to support the argument's conclusion". And so on.
In other words -- Don't ask yourself WHAT the statements are. Ask yourself WHY they are there.
Instead, just be as specific as possible about the interaction between these conclusions. (Note -- interaction. The statements are meaningless by themselves; they are only significant in relation to each other.)
E.g.,
... is the first one someone else's point, which the speaker then debunks/counter-argues/weakens with the second one?
... is the first one something that the speaker then uses as a reason for the second one?
... is the first one something that people once thought was true, but now those people believe the second one?
... is the first one the motivation behind some action, and the second one the effect that the speaker thinks the action will actually have?
Etc.
Two advantages here.
1/
This is way easier, because it's a normal human thought process. (Labeling things as "secondary conclusions" is much less normal on planet earth.)
2/
The things you come up with here will be what the answer choices actually say.
E.g., in my first example above, the correct answer would say that the first one is "a position that the argument challenges". In the second one, "a claim that is used to support the argument's conclusion". And so on.
In other words -- Don't ask yourself WHAT the statements are. Ask yourself WHY they are there.
2 posts Page 1 of 1