Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 27 Aug 2014, 05:25

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

CR The question to

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 07 Feb 2008
Posts: 315
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 1

GMAT Tests User
CR The question to [#permalink] New post 21 Mar 2008, 12:56
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

0% (00:00) correct 0% (00:00) wrong based on 0 sessions
The question whether intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is certainly imprecise, because we are not sure how different from us something might be and still count as “intelligent life.” Yet we cannot just decide to define “intelligent life” in some more precise way since it is likely that we will find and recognize intelligent life elsewhere in the universe only if we leave our definitions open to new, unimagined possibilities.

The passage, if seen as an objection to an antecedent claim, challenges that claim by:
(A) showing the claim to be irrelevant to the issue at hand
(B) citing examples that fail to fit proposed definition of “intelligent life”
(C) claiming that “intelligent life” cannot be adequately defined
(D) arguing that the claim, if acted on, would be counterproductive
(E) maintaining that the claim is not supported by the available evidence
SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1941
Schools: CBS, Kellogg
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 272 [0], given: 1

Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: CR The question to [#permalink] New post 22 Mar 2008, 20:54
Vavali wrote:
The question whether intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is certainly imprecise, because we are not sure how different from us something might be and still count as “intelligent life.” Yet we cannot just decide to define “intelligent life” in some more precise way since it is likely that we will find and recognize intelligent life elsewhere in the universe only if we leave our definitions open to new, unimagined possibilities.

The passage, if seen as an objection to an antecedent claim, challenges that claim by:
(A) showing the claim to be irrelevant to the issue at hand
(B) citing examples that fail to fit proposed definition of “intelligent life”
(C) claiming that “intelligent life” cannot be adequately defined
(D) arguing that the claim, if acted on, would be counterproductive
(E) maintaining that the claim is not supported by the available evidence


C
_________________

Get the best GMAT Prep Resources with GMAT Club Premium Membership

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 20 Dec 2004
Posts: 258
Followers: 6

Kudos [?]: 66 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR The question to [#permalink] New post 23 Mar 2008, 05:09
Why not D?

Is it not more relevant ?

....since it is likely that we will find and recognize intelligent life elsewhere in the universe only if we leave our definitions open to new, unimagined possibilities.

Does this not mean that if we did not refine our definition of "intelligent life" we could end up not finding other alien species ?
_________________

Stay Hungry, Stay Foolish

SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1941
Schools: CBS, Kellogg
Followers: 16

Kudos [?]: 272 [0], given: 1

Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: CR The question to [#permalink] New post 23 Mar 2008, 20:38
neelesh wrote:
Why not D?

Is it not more relevant ?

....since it is likely that we will find and recognize intelligent life elsewhere in the universe only if we leave our definitions open to new, unimagined possibilities.

Does this not mean that if we did not refine our definition of "intelligent life" we could end up not finding other alien species ?


It means that: if NOT open definitions, then "intelligent life" NOT be found and recognized. And this conditional reasoning adds more confirmation to the claim that "we cannot just decide to define “intelligent life” in some more precise way "

JUST MY OPINION
_________________

Get the best GMAT Prep Resources with GMAT Club Premium Membership

Intern
Intern
User avatar
Joined: 04 May 2004
Posts: 49
Location: India
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 0

Re: CR The question to [#permalink] New post 23 Mar 2008, 23:56
I will go for C.

Why?
Because C captures the argument in its entirety.

Why not D?
I dont think they are even talking about counter-productiveness of the argument. The statement just puts forth an arguments.
_________________

http://twitter.com/Saurabh

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 26 Jul 2007
Posts: 541
Schools: Stern, McCombs, Marshall, Wharton
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 97 [0], given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR The question to [#permalink] New post 24 Mar 2008, 07:11
I go with D.

This passage is an objection to an atecedent claim.
"Yet we cannot just decide to define “intelligent life” in some more precise way".

This leads me to believe that the atecedent claim is that we need to define "intellegent life" more precisely to determine if their is in fact intellegent life elsewhere.

In other words: We dont know exactly what intellegent life is so we cant determine if exist elsewhere. Lets define it more precisely, then we'll know if we find it.

The claim challenges this by stating: "it is likely that we will find and recognize intelligent life elsewhere in the universe only if we leave our definitions open to new, unimagined possibilities."

In other words: If we define it then we probably wont find it beacuase we will be eliminating options that are beyond our current comprehension.

So the claim is not that intellegent life cannot be "adequately defined". An adequate definition is not the problem a precise definition is. But thats besides the point, the claim is stating that if you do precisely define "intellegent life" then you probably wont find. So assigning a precise definition would be counterproductive to finding intellegent life.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
Joined: 07 Feb 2008
Posts: 315
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 1

GMAT Tests User
Re: CR The question to [#permalink] New post 24 Mar 2008, 07:17
OA is C
Re: CR The question to   [#permalink] 24 Mar 2008, 07:17
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
CR-1000 CR QUESTIONS perfectstranger 0 22 Jul 2008, 14:10
2 CR Question vd 10 10 Jun 2008, 02:14
CR Questions geeturaju 1 13 May 2008, 22:15
CR Questions vd 1 20 Apr 2008, 23:42
CR Question ayushi 5 09 Oct 2006, 07:23
Display posts from previous: Sort by

CR The question to

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.