GMAT Question of the Day: Daily via email | Daily via Instagram New to GMAT Club? Watch this Video

It is currently 27 Jan 2020, 17:16

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

If the artificial is not better than the natural, to what end are all

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

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Math Expert
User avatar
V
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Posts: 60687
If the artificial is not better than the natural, to what end are all  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Dec 2019, 03:27
1
1
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  75% (hard)

Question Stats:

41% (01:44) correct 59% (02:09) wrong based on 73 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

If the artificial is not better than the natural, to what end are all the arts of life? To dig, to plow, to build, to wear clothes—all are direct violations of the injunction to follow nature.

If the author’s argument were challenged on the grounds that the construction of buildings has adverse effects on the natural environment, which of the following replies might the author use to respond to the challenge logically?

(A) There are human activities, such as making music, that are
environmentally harmless.

(B) Harming the environment is not an end, or purpose, of the arts of life.

(C) The construction could involve the use of natural, not artificial, materials.

(D) Constructing buildings is not an “art of life.”

(E) Even if the natural environment is disturbed by the construction of buildings, it is improved for human use.

_________________
Director
Director
User avatar
V
Joined: 28 Jul 2016
Posts: 786
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Human Resources
GPA: 3.97
WE: Project Management (Investment Banking)
Reviews Badge
Re: If the artificial is not better than the natural, to what end are all  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Dec 2019, 11:02
The author is comparing forms art of life and only D helps author validate that since construction is not art of life.
It is out of scope
_________________

Keep it simple. Keep it blank
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 08 May 2019
Posts: 24
Re: If the artificial is not better than the natural, to what end are all  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Jan 2020, 01:02
Can anyone explain the question?
CrackVerbal Representative
User avatar
B
Joined: 02 Mar 2019
Posts: 52
Re: If the artificial is not better than the natural, to what end are all  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 12 Jan 2020, 23:19
I chose (E). Pre-thinking went like this.

The author's argument clearly is that "artificial" can be "better than natural". To this end, he/she presents as examples several skills such as digging, ploughing, building and wearing clothes. We need to identify what is common among these skills / activities since these form the basis of the author's argument.

While at first glance, they appear quite disparate (digging and ploughing are brute force activities, building today is a highly technological activity which wearing clothes is a matter of taste and art), we can identify that all of these activities are indulged in by human beings in order to achieve some purpose:

i) Digging - a wide variety of reasons, from laying foundations to burials.
ii) Ploughing - to grow crops and feed ourselves.
iii) Building - to make homes to live in.
iv) Wearing clothes - to protect us from the vagaries of nature (basic purpose).

The only thing all of these appear to have in common is that they, in some way, improve the lives of humans.

With this in mind, let us approach the options:

(A) There are human activities, such as making music, that are environmentally harmless. The author does not argue that "artificial is better than natural" because some activities do not harm the environment. Therefore, this is unlikely to be the author's counter argument.

(B) Harming the environment is not an end, or purpose, of the arts of life. The author does not defend the "artificial" because its intention is not to harm the environment. In fact, nowhere in the argument does intent play any role. Incorrect.

(C) The construction could involve the use of natural, not artificial, materials. The author's does not focus on the means of performing the arts at all. His/her argument is that "artificial" need not be worse than "natural" simply because of the wide variety of activities that result in something "artificial". Therefore, the use of materials is irrelevant to the author's argument.

(D) Constructing buildings is not an “art of life.” The author explicitly lists "building" as an art of life. Incorrect.

(E) Even if the natural environment is disturbed by the construction of buildings, it is improved for human use. This is consistent with our pre-thinking. Correct.

Hope this helps.
_________________
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 23 Feb 2012
Posts: 53
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
Schools: NUS '22
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: If the artificial is not better than the natural, to what end are all  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Jan 2020, 01:04
1
Harsh2111s wrote:
Can anyone explain the question?




f the artificial is not better than the natural, to what end are all the arts of life? To dig, to plow, to build, to wear clothes—all are direct violations of the injunction to follow nature. => Author questions if artificial is not better why there will be any thing such digging, building, cloths ? As all r violation but also arts of life(making life more beautiful and ease)

If the author’s argument were challenged on the grounds that the construction of buildings has adverse effects on the natural environment, which of the following replies might the author use to respond to the challenge logically? => Question mentioned a critics/ weakening statement "the construction of buildings has adverse effects on the natural environment" and asking to critisizing this , in turn strengthening Authors argument with respect to this crtitic statement.
Prethink (strengthening): Construction of building is violation but represents art of life.

(A) There are human activities, such as making music, that are
environmentally harmless. : True but not addressing the challenge "construction of buildings"

(B) Harming the environment is not an end, or purpose, of the arts of life. Irrelevant

(C) The construction could involve the use of natural, not artificial, materials. Irrelevant

(D) Constructing buildings is not an “art of life.” Opposite ; weakning authors arguemnt

(E) Even if the natural environment is disturbed by the construction of buildings, it is improved for human use. Correct
GMAT Club Bot
Re: If the artificial is not better than the natural, to what end are all   [#permalink] 13 Jan 2020, 01:04
Display posts from previous: Sort by

If the artificial is not better than the natural, to what end are all

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





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