Susan: Those who oppose experimentation on animals do not : GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR)
Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases http://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 20 Jan 2017, 09:45

### 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

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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Susan: Those who oppose experimentation on animals do not

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Retired Moderator
Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 994
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 196 [0], given: 5

Susan: Those who oppose experimentation on animals do not [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Apr 2009, 14:26
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

33% (02:50) correct 67% (01:25) wrong based on 9 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Susan: Those who oppose experimentation on animals do not properly value the preservation of human life. Although animal suffering is unfortunate, it is justifiable if it can lead to cures for human ailments.
Melvin: But much animal experimentation involves testing of ordinary consumer products such as soaps, dyes, and cosmetics.
Susan: These experiments are justifiable on the same grounds, since cleanliness, convenience, and beauty are worthwhile human values deserving of support.

Which of the following is the best statement of the logical flaw in Susan’s argument?

(A) Her claim that animal experimentation is justifiable if it supports human values contradicts her claim that such experimentation is justifiable only if it leads to cures for human ailments.
(B) She places a higher value on human cleanliness, convenience, and beauty than she does on the preservation of animal life.
(C) She uses the word “value” in two different senses.
(D) She assumes that all ordinary consumer products aid in the preservation of human life.
(E) She fails to show how mere support for human values actually preserves human lives.
If you have any questions
New!
Manager
Joined: 07 Jul 2007
Posts: 139
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 31 [1] , given: 0

Re: CR: experimentation of animals [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Apr 2009, 15:56
1
KUDOS
Susan: Those who oppose experimentation on animals do not properly value the preservation of human life. Although animal suffering is unfortunate, it is justifiable if it can lead to cures for human ailments.
Melvin: But much animal experimentation involves testing of ordinary consumer products such as soaps, dyes, and cosmetics.
Susan: These experiments are justifiable on the same grounds, since cleanliness, convenience, and beauty are worthwhile human values deserving of support.

Which of the following is the best statement of the logical flaw in Susan’s argument?

(A) Her claim that animal experimentation is justifiable if it supports human values contradicts her claim that such experimentation is justifiable only if it leads to cures for human ailments.
(B) She places a higher value on human cleanliness, convenience, and beauty than she does on the preservation of animal life.
(C) She uses the word “value” in two different senses.
(D) She assumes that all ordinary consumer products aid in the preservation of human life.
(E) She fails to show how mere support for human values actually preserves human lives.

IMO E). She has first said that experiments are justified for cures of human life but she has not justified how human value preserves human lives.
Retired Moderator
Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 994
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 196 [0], given: 5

Re: CR: experimentation of animals [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Apr 2009, 06:25
Can someone translate answer choice A for me? Why is A incorrect?
Director
Joined: 01 Apr 2008
Posts: 897
Name: Ronak Amin
Schools: IIM Lucknow (IPMX) - Class of 2014
Followers: 28

Kudos [?]: 645 [0], given: 18

Re: CR: experimentation of animals [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Apr 2009, 23:37
Agree with E. What is OA?

Not A because she is not contradicting directly....also the word "only" is too extreme...we cant be sure that she means "ONLY if it cures human ailments it is justifiable"..may be she can also have some other reasons to justify !!

Thus, C becomes tempting as it looks like Susan is digressing from her reason..but reading it again you will find that she is not trying to stress on "values"..so its not that she has two meanings of "values"..

Now E. Look at the last statement and the usage "on the same grounds". This means that she definitely gives the same reason (which also eliminates C) but then she should give proper examples to prove that human values(cleanliness,convenience) can preserve human lives.

Can someone translate answer choice A for me? Why is A incorrect?
Retired Moderator
Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 994
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 196 [0], given: 5

Re: CR: experimentation of animals [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Apr 2009, 05:03
Thanks for the explanation. OA is E.

Economist wrote:
Agree with E. What is OA?

Not A because she is not contradicting directly....also the word "only" is too extreme...we cant be sure that she means "ONLY if it cures human ailments it is justifiable"..may be she can also have some other reasons to justify !!

Thus, C becomes tempting as it looks like Susan is digressing from her reason..but reading it again you will find that she is not trying to stress on "values"..so its not that she has two meanings of "values"..

Now E. Look at the last statement and the usage "on the same grounds". This means that she definitely gives the same reason (which also eliminates C) but then she should give proper examples to prove that human values(cleanliness,convenience) can preserve human lives.

Can someone translate answer choice A for me? Why is A incorrect?
Current Student
Joined: 13 Jan 2009
Posts: 372
Location: India
Followers: 20

Kudos [?]: 120 [0], given: 1

Re: CR: experimentation of animals [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Apr 2009, 18:19
I would have also gone for A Dint read E carefully.
Senior Manager
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Posts: 311
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 322 [0], given: 1

Re: CR: experimentation of animals [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Apr 2009, 21:11
A) Her claim that animal experimentation is justifiable if it supports human values contradicts her claim that such experimentation is justifiable only if it leads to cures for human ailments. – there is no contradiction here. It’s a flaw in the susan’s stament that she talks about human life and convinces with human life. Other wise its clearly E.
(B) She places a higher value on human cleanliness, convenience, and beauty than she does on the preservation of animal life.
(C) She uses the word “value” in two different senses.
(D) She assumes that all ordinary consumer products aid in the preservation of human life.
(E) She fails to show how mere support for human values actually preserves human lives.
Manager
Joined: 19 Aug 2006
Posts: 248
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: experimentation of animals [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Apr 2009, 18:21
Love these types of CR. I wish we had more of the same type.
I choose E.
Director
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 838
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 71 [0], given: 0

Re: CR: experimentation of animals [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Apr 2009, 21:08
E stood out clearly
Manager
Joined: 11 Aug 2008
Posts: 161
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 49 [0], given: 8

Re: CR: experimentation of animals [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Oct 2009, 08:22
clearly E
Manager
Joined: 11 Aug 2009
Posts: 126
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 123 [0], given: 3

Re: CR: experimentation of animals [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Oct 2009, 10:04
Good one.

Susan: Those who oppose experimentation on animals do not properly value the preservation of human life. Although animal suffering is unfortunate, it is justifiable if it can lead to cures for human ailments.
Melvin: But much animal experimentation involves testing of ordinary consumer products such as soaps, dyes, and cosmetics.
Susan: These experiments are justifiable on the same grounds, since cleanliness, convenience, and beauty are worthwhile human values deserving of support.

Which of the following is the best statement of the logical flaw in Susan’s argument?

(A) Her claim that animal experimentation is justifiable if it supports human values contradicts her claim that such experimentation is justifiable only if it leads to cures for human ailments. Both claims are not contradicting.
(B) She places a higher value on human cleanliness, convenience, and beauty than she does on the preservation of animal life. She places a higher value on preservation of human life, not human cleanliness.
(C) She uses the word “value” in two different senses. She uses word 'value' in the same sences.
(D) She assumes that all ordinary consumer products aid in the preservation of human life. 'all' is too extreme. She doesn't necessarily mean all.....
(E) She fails to show how mere support for human values actually preserves human lives.
Manager
Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Posts: 224
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 79 [0], given: 6

Re: CR: experimentation of animals [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Oct 2009, 11:48
I think E as well.
Manager
Joined: 11 Jul 2009
Posts: 57
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 19

Re: CR: experimentation of animals [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Nov 2009, 02:49
Economist wrote:
Agree with E. What is OA?

Not A because she is not contradicting directly....also the word "only" is too extreme...we cant be sure that she means "ONLY if it cures human ailments it is justifiable"..may be she can also have some other reasons to justify !!

Thus, C becomes tempting as it looks like Susan is digressing from her reason..but reading it again you will find that she is not trying to stress on "values"..so its not that she has two meanings of "values"..

Now E. Look at the last statement and the usage "on the same grounds". This means that she definitely gives the same reason (which also eliminates C) but then she should give proper examples to prove that human values(cleanliness,convenience) can preserve human lives.

Can someone translate answer choice A for me? Why is A incorrect?

Thanks for the explaination Economist. It helped.
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10534
Followers: 919

Kudos [?]: 203 [0], given: 0

Re: Susan: Those who oppose experimentation on animals do not [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 May 2014, 19:44
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.
Manager
Joined: 24 May 2016
Posts: 173
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 78 [0], given: 33

Susan: Those who oppose experimentation on animals do not [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Aug 2016, 01:15
Susan: Those who oppose experimentation on animals do not properly value the preservation of human life. Although animal suffering is unfortunate, it is justifiable if it can lead to cures for human ailments.
Melvin: But much animal experimentation involves testing of ordinary consumer products such as soaps, dyes, and cosmetics.
Susan: These experiments are justifiable on the same grounds, since cleanliness, convenience, and beauty are worthwhile human values deserving of support.

Which of the following is the best statement of the logical flaw in Susan’s argument?

A) Her claim that animal experimentation is justifiable if it supports human values contradicts her claim that such experimentation is justifiable only if it leads to cures for human ailments.
This option distorts what Susan says. She does not claim that "animal experimentation is justifiable only if it leads to cures for human ailments".
B) She places a higher value on human cleanliness, convenience, and beauty than she does on the preservation of animal life.
Even if this was the case, why would it be a logical flaw? It would just be her opinion.
C) She uses the word “value” in two different senses.
These two uses of the word "value" are not incompatible between each other. Indeed, they are related to each other.
Furthermore, as long as she reasons her argument, she can use as many acceptions of the word "value" as she wants and her argument will still be logical.

D) She assumes that all ordinary consumer products aid in the preservation of human life.
This option also distorts what Susan says. She does not assume that all consumer products aid in the preservation of human life.
E) She fails to show how mere support for human values actually preserves human lives.
Susan: Those who oppose experimentation on animals do not   [#permalink] 19 Aug 2016, 01:15
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
13 Those who oppose abortion upon demand make the foundation of 12 17 Jul 2012, 14:55
Q. Susan: Those who oppose experimentation on animals do not 2 30 May 2009, 03:12
1 Susan: Those who oppose experimentation on animals do not 6 14 Nov 2008, 03:30
2 Susan: Those who oppose experimentation on animals do not 23 04 May 2008, 16:00
Susan: Those who oppose experimentation on animals do not 4 18 Jun 2007, 17:58
Display posts from previous: Sort by