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 down production in response to a recent rise in its inventory of finished products. It is doubtful whether an investors sniping at management can ever be an thing other than counterproductive, but in this case it is clearly not justified. It is true that <b> an increased inventory of finished products often indicates that production is outstripping demand </b>, but in Burton' s case it indicates no such thing. Rather, <b> the increase in inventory is entirely attributable to products that have already been assigned to orders received from customers </b>. In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles? ['The first states a generalization that underlies the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second clarifies the meaning of a specific phrase as it is used in that generalization.', 'The first provides evidence to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole the second states that conclusion', 'The first states a generalization that underlies the position that the argument as a whole opposes; the second provides evidence to show that the generalization does not apply in the case at issue', 'The first provides evidence to support the conclusion of the argument as a whole, the second is evidence that has been used to support the position that the argument as a whole opposes']