Forum Home > GMAT > Quantitative > Problem Solving (PS)
Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Dec 1310:00 AM EST
-12:00 PM EST
Have you ever wondered how to score a PERFECT 805 on the GMAT? Meet Julia, a banking professional who used the Target Test Prep course to achieve this incredible feat. Julia's story is nothing short of an inspiration.
Dec 1410:00 AM EST
-12:00 PM EST
Think a 100% GMAT Verbal score is out of your reach? Target Test Prep will make you think again! Our course uses techniques such as topical study and spaced repetition to maximize knowledge retention and make studying simple and fun.
Dec 1411:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this session to learn how to Deconstruct arguments, Pre-Think Author’s Assumptions, and apply Negation Test.- Dec 15
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Dec 1608:00 AM PST
-11:59 PM PST
GMAT Club 12 Days of Christmas is a 4th Annual GMAT Club Winter Competition based on solving questions. This is the Winter GMAT competition on GMAT Club with an amazing opportunity to win over $40,000 worth of prizes!
07 Apr 2020, 05:59
Kudos
Bookmarks
B
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
35%
(medium)
Question Stats:
71% (01:43) correct
29%
(01:56)
wrong
based on 233
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Carl: Researchers who perform operations on animals for experimental purposes are legally required to complete detailed pain protocols indicating whether the animals will be at risk of pain and, if so, what step will be taken to minimize or alleviate it. Yet when human beings undergo operations, such protocols are never required. If lawmakers were as concerned about human beings as they seem to be about animals, there would be pain protocols for human beings.
Debbie: But consider this: a person for whom a doctor wants to schedule surgery can simply be told what pain to expect and can then decide whether or not to undergo the operation. So you see, pain protocols are unnecessary for human beings.
Debbie attempts to counter Carl’s argument by
(A) showing that one of the claims on which Carl bases his conclusion is inaccurate
(B) pointing out a relevant difference to undermine an analogy on which Carl bases his conclusion
(C) claiming that Carl’s argument should be rejected because it is based on an appeal to sentimentality rather than on reasoned principles
(D) drawing an analogy that illustrates a major flaw in Carl’s argument
(E) offering a specific example to demonstrate that Carl’s argument is based on a claim that can be neither confirmed nor disproved
Debbie: But consider this: a person for whom a doctor wants to schedule surgery can simply be told what pain to expect and can then decide whether or not to undergo the operation. So you see, pain protocols are unnecessary for human beings.
Debbie attempts to counter Carl’s argument by
(A) showing that one of the claims on which Carl bases his conclusion is inaccurate
(B) pointing out a relevant difference to undermine an analogy on which Carl bases his conclusion
(C) claiming that Carl’s argument should be rejected because it is based on an appeal to sentimentality rather than on reasoned principles
(D) drawing an analogy that illustrates a major flaw in Carl’s argument
(E) offering a specific example to demonstrate that Carl’s argument is based on a claim that can be neither confirmed nor disproved
10 Apr 2020, 11:44
Kudos
Bookmarks
B.
The reason is that Debbie pointed out human can be informed about the pain information, a relevant difference between the case of human and that of animal.
Posted from my mobile device
The reason is that Debbie pointed out human can be informed about the pain information, a relevant difference between the case of human and that of animal.
Posted from my mobile device
16 Apr 2020, 17:31
Kudos
Bookmarks
Carl: Researchers who perform operations on animals for experimental purposes are legally required to complete detailed pain protocols indicating whether the animals will be at risk of pain and, if so, what step will be taken to minimize or alleviate it. Yet when human beings undergo operations, such protocols are never required. If lawmakers were as concerned about human beings as they seem to be about animals, there would be pain protocols for human beings.
Debbie: But consider this: a person for whom a doctor wants to schedule surgery can simply be told what pain to expect and can then decide whether or not to undergo the operation. So you see, pain protocols are unnecessary for human beings.
Debbie attempts to counter Carl’s argument by
Carl: Pain protocols for animal
But, This does not apply to human.
If humans are concerned by lawmakers -> Pain protocol for human being
Debbie: But, Humans -> told by doctors about pain -> Pain protocol for human being = unnecessary
So what is going on here? Debbie refute Carl's conclusion that Pain protocol is necessary by contrasting the difference between humans and animal. Humans are able to understand whether the process will be painful; in contrast, Animals aren't not able to do so. There, Pain protocols are unnecessary for humans.
There is no new information here. So Debbie did not attack the Carls' argument by providing new information, rather he evaluates Carl's premises.
Let's check out the options
Only B is left. (B) is the correct answer.
Debbie: But consider this: a person for whom a doctor wants to schedule surgery can simply be told what pain to expect and can then decide whether or not to undergo the operation. So you see, pain protocols are unnecessary for human beings.
Debbie attempts to counter Carl’s argument by
Carl: Pain protocols for animal
But, This does not apply to human.
If humans are concerned by lawmakers -> Pain protocol for human being
Debbie: But, Humans -> told by doctors about pain -> Pain protocol for human being = unnecessary
So what is going on here? Debbie refute Carl's conclusion that Pain protocol is necessary by contrasting the difference between humans and animal. Humans are able to understand whether the process will be painful; in contrast, Animals aren't not able to do so. There, Pain protocols are unnecessary for humans.
There is no new information here. So Debbie did not attack the Carls' argument by providing new information, rather he evaluates Carl's premises.
Let's check out the options
Quote:
(A) showing that one of the claims on which Carl bases his conclusion is inaccurate
He did not state that the premises are inaccurate. He explained that the two premises are different to each other a certain extent. (A) is out.Quote:
(B) pointing out a relevant difference to undermine an analogy on which Carl bases his conclusion
This matches our thought. Hang on to this.Quote:
(C) claiming that Carl’s argument should be rejected because it is based on an appeal to sentimentality rather than on reasoned principles
Carl's conclusion is not based on an appeal to sentimentality, but rather on reasoned principles. This choice states the opposite. (C) is out.Quote:
(D) drawing an analogy that illustrates a major flaw in Carl’s argument
Debbie did not state that Carl's argument is flaw. Furthermore, he did not draw an analogy. Instead, he elaborate Carl's analogy by comparing the subjects.Quote:
(E) offering a specific example to demonstrate that Carl’s argument is based on a claim that can be neither confirmed nor disproved
Did he offer any specific example? No he did not. Only B is left. (B) is the correct answer.
