For democracy to survive, it is imperative that the average citizen be

can someone please explain why B?
because I feel that option is just too much extreme
and why not E?

Informed choices are essential for democracy. If the public cannot keep up with scientific advances they can't make informed choices, and therefore democracy is not possible, hence it is "threatened."

E isn't correct because the text doesn't specify how many citizens should keep up. It only says the average citizen must be able to make informed decisions.

(A) Scientists have a duty to educate the public. --> eliminate. Argument is not pointing to scientists to educate people; they need to educate themselves.

(B) The survival of democracy is threatened by the advance of scientific knowledge. --> Correct by POE

(C) Every citizen has a duty to and can become scientifically literate. --> argument does not state that citizens have a "duty" to do anything; it's if we wish to maintain democracy, citizen should be versed in scientific topics

(D) The most effective democracy is one that is the most scientifically unsophisticated. --> eliminate right away

(E) Democracy will survive if there are at least some citizens who are capable of developing informed opinions on important scientific issues. --> SOME is problematic. Is some the average citizen? No. We can't make that assumption. The argument is for the average person. There will always be a part of the population that will be more interested in scientific discovery, etc, but that doesn't mean that the entire population will understand it.

For democracy to survive, it is imperative that the average citizen be able to develop informed opinions about important policy issues. In today's society, this means that citizens must be able to develop informed opinions on many scientific subjects, from ecosystems to defence system. Yet, as scientific knowledge advances, the average citizen is increasingly unable to absorb enough information to develop informed opinions on many important issues.

The question is saying that if Democracy survives, then the average citizen must be able to have informed opinions on science related topics. This implies that unless average citizen is able to have informed opinion, democracy will not survive. Although this rather sounds cold logic, the sentence is trying to imply that. This is because it uses the word 'Imperative', which means of vital importance.

Of the following, which one follows logically from the passage?

(A) Scientists have a duty to educate the public.Too broad and unrelated.

(B) The survival of democracy is threatened by the advance of scientific knowledge.

(C) Every citizen has a duty to and can become scientifically literate.No where the statement is saying Citizens must do X

(D) The most effective democracy is one that is the most scientifically unsophisticatedThere isnt any concept of effective democracy that the question prompt discusses

(E) Democracy will survive if there are at least some citizens who are capable of developing informed opinions on important scientific issues.

This sounds like a correct answer. BUT it says if at least some citizens--does this represent average? Event if that may be true the statement does not say that just because average citizen is informed Democracy will survive. The reverse may or may not be true.


All of this leads to only one choice remaining. Choice B says that advancement is Science will threaten democracy. This appears to fit the underlying logic. So this should be the answer

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.