Obviously, entrepreneurial ability

Answer choices

1. A

   Wrong Role2% picked this

   It is the main conclusion drawn in

   The main conclusion is the final claim of the paragraph. A claim could never be the main conclusion if it's followed by the word "Hence", because the "hence" indicates that a conclusion is being drawn on top of that.

   2%
2. B

   Not an Example of Main Conclusion7% picked this

   It is presented as an example of the phenomenon the argument

   Is this argument seeking to explain a phenomenon? Not really. That language means "to offer a causal explanation for something that happened / is happening". This argument is only trying to demonstrate that each of two factors has the power to thwart the successful development of a company. If we stretched this answer to fit, we'd say the phenomenon the author seeks to explain is that of "a company failing due to lack of managerial skills or lack of entrepreneurial ability". An example of that phenomenon would be a specific company that failed due to one of these things. The claim we're being asked about certainly isn't providing a specific case study in failure. Our claim is giving an example of how someone's managerial skills could be lacking. But the argument doesn't seek to explain "how someone's managerial skills could be lacking".

   7%
3. C

   Wrong Role1% picked this

   It is meant as an aside and is not supposed to provide evidence in support

   This portrays our claim as neutral Background info, but we know this claim plays a supporting role. After all, it's followed by the word Hence. Conclusion indicators such as So, Thus, Hence, Therefore always indicate that the claim immediately before them is providing some support.

   1%
4. D

   Not Directly22% picked this

   It is a premise that is intended to support the argument’s

   The claim we're being asked about exists in a sentence that is prefaced by the phrase For instance. "For instance / for example" always indicate that sentence we're now reading is supporting the sentence we just read. We know the 3rd sentence is directly supporting the 2nd sentence, and the 2nd sentence is directly supporting the 4th sentence (the main conclusion).

   22%
5. E

   Correct68% picked this

   It is an example that is offered in support of a premise that is intended to support the

   Why this is right

   The claim we're being asked about exists in a sentence that is prefaced by the phrase For instance. "For instance / for example" always indicate that sentence we're now reading is an example that supports the previous claim. We know the 3rd sentence is offering an example to support the 2nd sentence. 2nd: many entrepreneurs fail for lack of managerial skills 3rd: for example, they can fail because they lack the managerial skills to adequately manage company growth. Is the 2nd sentence a premise intended to support the argument's main conclusion directly? Yes. The final sentence (the main conclusion) is directly supported by the first two sentences. Sentence 1 establishes that a lack of entrepreneurial skills can tank a business. Sentence 2 establishes that lack of managerial skills can also do so. The 2nd sentence is an Intermediate Conclusion, aka a Subsidiary Conclusion, aka a Supported Premise.

   Skill tested: Role · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   68%