GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 19 Jul 2018, 16:03

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.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Ethicist: Many environmentalists hold

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Manager
Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 30 Apr 2016
Posts: 62
Location: India
GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V38
GPA: 4
Premium Member Reviews Badge
Ethicist: Many environmentalists hold  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Apr 2017, 09:47
4
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  65% (hard)

Question Stats:

61% (02:10) correct 39% (02:31) wrong based on 187 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

Ethicist: Many environmentalists hold that the natural environment is morally valuable for its own sake,regardless of any benefits it provides us.However,even if nature has no moral value,nature can be regarded as worth preserving simply on the grounds that people find it beautiful.Moreover,because it is philosophically disputable whether nature is morally valuable but undeniable that it is beautiful,an argument for preserving nature that emphasizes nature’s beauty will be less vulnerable to logical objections than one that emphasizes its moral value. The ethicist’s reasoning most closely conforms to which one of the following principles?

(A) An argument in favor of preserving nature will be less open to logical objections if it avoids the issue of what makes nature worth preserving.
(B) If an argument for preserving nature emphasizes a specific characteristic of nature and is vulnerable to logical objections,then that characteristic does not provide a sufficient reason for preserving nature.
(C) If it is philosophically disputable whether nature has a certain characteristic,then nature would be more clearly worth preserving if it did not have that characteristic.
(D) Anything that has moral value is worth preserving regardless of whether people consider it to be beautiful.
(E) An argument for preserving nature will be less open to logical objections if it appeals to a characteristic that can be regarded as a basis for preserving nature and that philosophically indisputably belongs to nature.
1 KUDOS received
Board of Directors
User avatar
V
Status: Stepping into my 10 years long dream
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Posts: 3687
Premium Member Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Ethicist: Many environmentalists hold  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Apr 2017, 10:01
1
1
In short, the argument is saying whether it adds moral value or not, it is beautiful hence should be preserved. Then the argument uses certain points to prove its beauty and hence why is should be preserved. That means one property is sufficient to preserve irrespective of other properties.

Option E clearly says so.

(A) An argument in favor of preserving nature will be less open to logical objections if it avoids the issue of what makes nature worth preserving. : No, this avoid thing is not mentioned anywhere.
(B) If an argument for preserving nature emphasizes a specific characteristic of nature and is vulnerable to logical objections,then that characteristic does not provide a sufficient reason for preserving nature. This is opposite.
(C) If it is philosophically disputable whether nature has a certain characteristic,then nature would be more clearly worth preserving if it did not have that characteristic. : We are not sure about this. We are given the it is philosophically acceptable. What would happen it is disputable is OFS.
(D) Anything that has moral value is worth preserving regardless of whether people consider it to be beautiful. : Too extreme to select
(E) An argument for preserving nature will be less open to logical objections if it appeals to a characteristic that can be regarded as a basis for preserving nature and that philosophically indisputably belongs to nature. Correct, as per reasoning mentioned above.
_________________

My GMAT Story: From V21 to V40
My MBA Journey: My 10 years long MBA Dream
My Secret Hacks: Best way to use GMATClub | Importance of an Error Log!
Verbal Resources: All SC Resources at one place | All CR Resources at one place
Blog: Subscribe to Question of the Day Blog

GMAT Club Inbuilt Error Log Functionality - View More.
New Visa Forum - Ask all your Visa Related Questions - here.

New! Best Reply Functionality on GMAT Club!



Find a bug in the new email templates and get rewarded with 2 weeks of GMATClub Tests for free

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 24 Apr 2017
Posts: 4
Re: Ethicist: Many environmentalists hold  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Apr 2017, 10:10
Good question..i chose C but now I know why it's wrong

Sent from my Moto G (4) using GMAT Club Forum mobile app
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 19 Oct 2012
Posts: 341
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Operations
GMAT 1: 660 Q47 V35
GMAT 2: 710 Q50 V38
GPA: 3.81
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Ethicist: Many environmentalists hold  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 May 2017, 04:44
E encapsulates the Ethicist's reasoning. Other options are either irrelevant or do not cover all notions of Ethicist.
_________________

Citius, Altius, Fortius

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
P
Status: To infinity and beyond
Joined: 26 Sep 2017
Posts: 267
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Technology
GMAT 1: 660 Q50 V30
GPA: 3.31
WE: Engineering (Computer Software)
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: Ethicist: Many environmentalists hold  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 06 Oct 2017, 11:40
nippu wrote:
Good question..i chose C but now I know why it's wrong

Sent from my Moto G (4) using GMAT Club Forum mobile app



E's reasoning matches the reasoning in the text. It is perfectly right.
_________________

Please give kudos if you like my post.Thanks

Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 29 Dec 2016
Posts: 30
Location: India
Concentration: Finance
WE: Supply Chain Management (Energy and Utilities)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Ethicist: Many environmentalists hold  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Mar 2018, 10:12
aurobindomahanty wrote:
Ethicist: Many environmentalists hold that the natural environment is morally valuable for its own sake,regardless of any benefits it provides us.However,even if nature has no moral value,nature can be regarded as worth preserving simply on the grounds that people find it beautiful.Moreover,because it is philosophically disputable whether nature is morally valuable but undeniable that it is beautiful,an argument for preserving nature that emphasizes nature’s beauty will be less vulnerable to logical objections than one that emphasizes its moral value. The ethicist’s reasoning most closely conforms to which one of the following principles?

(A) An argument in favor of preserving nature will be less open to logical objections if it avoids the issue of what makes nature worth preserving.
(B) If an argument for preserving nature emphasizes a specific characteristic of nature and is vulnerable to logical objections,then that characteristic does not provide a sufficient reason for preserving nature.
(C) If it is philosophically disputable whether nature has a certain characteristic,then nature would be more clearly worth preserving if it did not have that characteristic.
(D) Anything that has moral value is worth preserving regardless of whether people consider it to be beautiful.
(E) An argument for preserving nature will be less open to logical objections if it appeals to a characteristic that can be regarded as a basis for preserving nature and that philosophically indisputably belongs to nature.


(A) An argument in favor of preserving nature will be less open to logical objections if it avoids the issue of what makes nature worth preserving. - The argument talks about beauty as a reason that makes nature worth protecting. Wrong.
(B) If an argument for preserving nature emphasizes a specific characteristic of nature and is vulnerable to logical objections,then that characteristic does not provide a sufficient reason for preserving nature. - The argument says the use of beauty characteristic is less vulnerable to logical observation than use of moral value and therefore a stronger reason to protect nature. Wrong.
(C) If it is philosophically disputable whether nature has a certain characteristic,then nature would be more clearly worth preserving if it did not have that characteristic. - The argument says if one characteristic is undeniable (or undisputable) then worth preserving. It does not imply that if disputable then worth preserving if it did not have that characteristic. Wrong.
(D) Anything that has moral value is worth preserving regardless of whether people consider it to be beautiful. - Trying to generalize from one case (about nature) is wrong. Moreover, the question is about the ethicist's reasoning. Wrong.
(E) An argument for preserving nature will be less open to logical objections if it appeals to a characteristic that can be regarded as a basis for preserving nature and that philosophically indisputably belongs to nature. - Correct
Re: Ethicist: Many environmentalists hold &nbs [#permalink] 02 Mar 2018, 10:12
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Ethicist: Many environmentalists hold

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Events & Promotions

PREV
NEXT


cron

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

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

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®.