A prominent investor who holds a large stake in the Burton Tool Company has recently claimed that the company is mismanaged.As evidence for this claim, the investor cited the company's failure to slow production in response to a recent rise in its inventory of finished products.It is doubtful whether an investor's sniping at management can ever be anything other than counterproductive, but in this case it is clearly not justified.It is true that an increased inventory of finished products often indicates that production is outstripping demand.In Burton's case it indicates no such thing, however: the increase in inventory is entirely attributable to products that have already been assigned to orders received from customers.
In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?
A. The first provides evidence to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second states that conclusion.
B. The first states the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second states an intermediate conclusion that is drawn in order to support that conclusion.
C. The first is the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides evidence against the position being opposed.
D. The first states an intermediate conclusion that is drawn in order to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second states the conclusion of the argument as a whole.
E. The first and the second both state intermediate conclusions that are drawn in order to support jointly the conclusion of the argument as a whole.
这个boldface的部分是一位做过的同学加出来的，我个人感觉有点问题。
答案是B。
我认为是C。
请指教。谢谢。
作者: alohabrian 时间: 2009-3-24 15:54 我也觉得选C
The first states the conclusion of the argument as a whole; the second states an intermediate conclusion that is drawn in order to support that conclusion.
Argument里面提到：因为B公司在其inventory of finished products增加的情况下，并没有slow production --> 所以investor认为这家公司mismanaged。而这篇argument的author却认为在B公司的这个case下，investor的claim是not justified，in the case it is clearly not justified，这应该是argument的main conclusion。而第二个BF部分，author给出具体的理由说明为什么在B公司的这个case里investor的claim是不成立，即the increase in inventory is entirely attributable to products that have already been assigned to orders received from customers，这个可以作为intermediate conclusion去support main conclusion。
另外，下面是GWD里面的原题，BF部分不一样，正确答案是C。
ffice:smarttags">ffice:smarttags">
32. GWD28-Q32:
A prominent investor who holds a large stake in the Burton Tool Company has recently claimed that the company is mismanaged, citing as evidence the company’s failure to slow production in response to a recent rise in its inventory of finished products.It is doubtful whether an investor’s sniping at management can ever be anything other than counterproductive, but in this case it is clearly not justified.It is true that an increased inventory of finished products often indicates that production is outstripping demand, but in Burton’s case it indicates no such thing.Rather, the increase in inventory is entirely attributable to products that have already been assigned to orders received from customers.
C. The first states the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second states the conclusion of the argument as a whole.
作者: balabaladou7 时间: 2009-3-25 11:22
谢谢ezailshi！
我知道错在哪里了。读题时对failure to slow production 这个地方理解正相反了。
我还在想，怎么有这么理智的投资者。。。
作者: alohabrian 时间: 2009-3-25 12:41
有一处，不理解，第二句话： the increase in inventory is entirely attributable to products that have already been assigned to orders received from customers
An intermediate conclusion is something in an argument that functions both as a reason and as a conclusion.
To function as a reason, it must offer support to the main conclusion of the argument (or to another intermediate conclusion).
To function as a conclusion, there must be something else in the argument that lends it support.
Take, for example, the following argument: “Your face is covered in chocolate, so it must have been you that ate my cake, so you owe me a cake.” The main conclusion of this argument is the final clause: “You owe me a cake.” This is supported by the previous clause, which is therefore functioning as a reason, “it must have been you that ate my cake.” This clause, though, is also supported by the previous clause, “Your face is covered in chocolate”, so it is both a conclusion and a reason; it is an intermediate conclusion.
我是这样理解的：
大结论是：that investor claimed that the company is mismanaged is clearly not justified
支持这个结论的原因是：the increase in inventory is entirely attributable to products that have already been assigned to orders received from customers
而支持这个原因/结论的事实是：It is true that an increased inventory of finished products often indicates that production is outstripping demand.In Burton's case it indicates no such thing,
the increase in inventory is entirely attributable to products that have already been assigned to orders received from customers
evidence的解释：
Information indicating whether something is true or valid. It is something that supports the argument, or tries to prove it's validity .Evidence may include facts, but an evidence is usually stronger than a fact. The evidence are the direct elements required for the conclusion to stand whereas facts are not necessary for the conclusion to stand.
这句话应该是evidence，同意alohabrian的看法。而它support的是In Burton's case it indicates no such thing这个conclusion或者说是intermediate conclusion。
open to discussion
作者: balabaladou7 时间: 2009-3-25 14:17
现在我同意第一个划线部分为： in this case it is clearly not justified
这时我们就要判断到底哪个推哪个了，仔细想想the increase in inventory is entirely attributable to products that have already been assigned to orders received from customers 是可以推出in this case it is clearly not justified
但是如果反过来的话就不好了，有了前因才有后果it is not justified.
具体考试时可能在压力大紧张情况下不能做出很正确的判断， 但这个还要经得起细细推敲的！！作者: DeliciaAn 时间: 2015-6-29 15:53
这道题目的粗体画错了吧？
这是曼哈顿论坛的boldface处。如果是这种的话，那么答案就没有争议了。
A prominent investor who holds a large stake in the Burton Tool company has recently claimed that the company is mismanaged, citing as evidence the company's failure to slow production in response to a recent rise in its inventory of finished products. It is doubtful whether an investor's sniping at management can ever be anything other than counterproductive, but in this case it is clearly not justified. It is true that an increased inventory of finished products often indicates that production is outstripping demand, but in Burton's case it indicates no such thing. Rather, the increase in inventory is entirely attributable to products that have already been assigned to orders received from customers.
In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?
