#16 - Software reviewer: Dictation software allows a

[ssnasir]

Hi there,

I had more of a general question. I got this right during the test but started overthinking during blind review. I think the "Although dictation software has been promoted as a..." statement worked as a counter-premise and during blind review I assumed that this is a sub-conclusion. I think the reason that part isn't a sub-conclusion is because it has no support from any of the other premises?
I guess I was wondering if counter-premises ever function as a sub-conclusion?
Sorry if this is weird. But thank you so much for all your help!

[Jeremy Press]

Hi ssnasir,

You're right that the claim you identified is not an intermediate conclusion because it doesn't have anything supporting it within the argument. An intermediate (aka "subsidiary") conclusion will always have some other statement in the argument that gives it support. The portion of the argument you identified is essentially a claim the argument is structured to refute. "Dictation software has been promoted as a labor-saving invention" (by others). But the author wants us to believe such software not a labor saving device (for reasons given in the last two sentences of the argument).

I can't think of a situation where a counter-premise could plausibly serve an intermediate conclusion function (mostly because it runs counter to the argument, and the intermediate conclusion is a key support for the main conclusion of the argument). And I can tell you with absolute certainty that there will never be a situation where a claim the author is trying to refute (like the claim you mentioned) would be an "intermediate conclusion," simply because something the author is trying to refute cannot be a crucial support for the author's main conclusion.

Good work, and I hope this helps!

Jeremy

[ssnasir]

Thank you!

[mateoguillamont]

Hello! Can someone explain why answer choice A is wrong? I thought the conclusion of this argument (that dictation software fails to live up to its billing) is supported by the last two sentences. I see that C is the correct answer, but what conclusion is the phrase "fails to live up to its billing" directly supporting?

Thanks!

[Robert Carroll]

mateoguillamont,

As you said, that IS the conclusion. So it's not supporting anything. Everything else is supporting it. I think you may be confused because answer choice (C) is not correct! Answer choice (B) is correct here. Hope that helps!

Robert Carroll

[captwentworth]

Hi, for this question, I thought the argument's conclusion was the whole sentence: "Although the software has been said to save labor, it fails to..." Could you confirm if this is correct or if I should only consider the latter "it fails to..." part as the argument's conclusion?

My reason for thinking that the argument's conclusion was the whole sentence stems from an explanation I saw re: PT54-S4-Q9 on this forum. Explanations for PT54-S4-Q9 stated that its argument's conclusion was the whole sentence, comprised of 2 parts: "although it’d not be wrong for the Jacksons not to do so " and "it’d be laudable for the Jacksons to pass along the number."

Therefore, I chose A for this question, thinking that, although "it fails to..." is a part of the argument's conclusion, it's not the whole/complete part of the conclusion (e.g., it lacks the "although the software has been said to save labor" part, which I thought was also a part of the argument's conclusion).

Could someone please correct my understanding / point out where I'm making mistakes?

[Hanin Abu Amara]

Hi!

You always want to consider the entire context when deciding whether the entire sentence is the conclusion or simply a fragment of it. Here, we have "Although dictation software has been promoted as a labor-saving invention, it fails to live up to its billing." The entire sentence can't be the conclusion because the second part "it fails to live up to its billing" seems to point out that the first part of the phrase is incorrect. Although it is marketed as something that saves money, it fails to do that. So the first part isn't something the author believes or agrees with, it is put forward as something other people believe that the author disagrees with to some extent.

Hope that makes sense

[captwentworth]

This is really helpful, thank you!