One of the greatest challenges facing medical students today, apart fr

ShankSouljaBoi

Question #6

(E) partial disapproval of the method and approval of some of its effects

though Author is against the traditional method, yet in the last paragraph mentions following: (in the red: the author says, it doesn't meant they need to relinquish all moral principle of traditional method. Hence it is E


It does not follow that readers, including medical professionals, must relinquish all moral principles, as is the case with situational ethics, in which decisions about ethical choices are made on the basis of intuition ad are entirely relative to the circumstances in which they arise.

Question #4


In the first paragraph the author introduces a method - Training in ethics that takes narrative literature as its primary subject – to solve the issue.


Requiring students to immerse themselves completely in medical coursework risks disconnecting them from the personal and ethical aspects of doctoring, and such strictly scientific thinking is insufficient for grappling with modern ethical dilemmas. For these reasons, aspiring physicians need to develop new ways of thinking about and interacting with patients. Training in ethics that takes narrative literature as its primary subject is one method of accomplishing this.


In para 2 the author explains how valuable this method is compared to traditional one, which is of little value


Although the conceptual clarity provided by a traditional ethics course can be valuable, theorizing about ethics contributes little to the understanding of everyday human experience or to preparing medical students for the multifarious ethical dilemmas they will face as physicians.
A true foundation in ethics must be predicated on an understanding of human behavior that reflects a wide array of relationships and readily adapts to various perspectives, for this is what is required to develop empathy. Ethics courses drawing on narrative literature can better help students prepare for ethical dilemmas precisely because such literature attaches its readers so forcefully to the concrete and varied would of human events.

In para 3, author provides more advantages of narrative literature, contributing to flexible ethical thinking.

The act of reading narrative literature is uniquely suited to the development of what might be called flexible ethical thinking. To grasp the development of character, to tangle with heightening moral crises, and to engage oneself with the story not as one’s own but nevertheless as something recognizable and worthy of attention, readers must use their moral imagination. Giving oneself over to the ethical conflicts in a story requires the abandonment of strictly absolute, inviolate sets of moral principles. Reading literature also demands that the reader adopt another person’s point of view –that of the narrator or a character in a story—and thus requires the ability to depart from one’s personal ethical stance and examine moral issues from new perspectives.

So, (E) To demonstrate the value of a well-designed ethics education for medical students.

Got 2 wrong(3&4), and took 18:12 (5:42 in reading 12:30 in questions)

how to improve speed?

There is no single formula to improve reading speed - I would suggest reading books in your free time to just improve speed and understanding accurately with fast speed.

Also, for RC specifically - you can check this out. This technique of skimming seems to help a lot of people who are facing timing issues on the RC. Personally, I prefer reading the whole passage and trying to make a mental list of the main point, scope and the tone of the author. The benefit of reading end to end is that one can quickly zero in on the detail-question related data.

Best,
Gladi

Gladiator59

earlier I was facing accuracy&timing issues, now this is the third passage that I am reading on whole(because I read the strategy, and I have increased my accuracy to (66-75%) from 50%.
Now that I think I am getting better accuracy, I need to improve timings .. how much time do you take to read the whole passage on average?

The time taken to read a passage depends on the passage itself - a very tough long passage will take longer than a short single para one. However, I tend to keep a dead-stop at around 3.5 to 4 mins. Post this you need to start answering the questions as each question too will take at least half a minute. At the end of the day, the GMAT does not give separate time to read the passage and answer the questions so you must keep in mind that 2 mins per question is a dead-stop, and any more time wasted would have to be compensated from other questions.

I usually comment with the time taken below passages when I am attempting to write answer explanations. You can check my previous posts to find them.

Regards,
Gladi

Brutal passage
able to manage 4/5 not attempted 3rd ques ( focusing on accuracy )

I will tell you how I grasped the Important Information from the passage

One of the greatest challenges facing medical students today, apart from absorbing volumes of technical information and learning habits of scientific thought, is that of remaining empathetic to the needs of patients in the face of all this rigorous training. Requiring students to immerse themselves completely in medical coursework risks disconnecting them from the personal and ethical aspects of doctoring, and such strictly scientific thinking is insufficient for grappling with modern ethical dilemmas. For these reasons, aspiring physicians need to develop new ways of thinking about and interacting with patients. Training in ethics that takes narrative literature as its primary subject is one method of accomplishing this.

Although training in ethics is currently provided by medical schools, this training relies heavily on an abstract, philosophical view of ethics. Although the conceptual clarity provided by a traditional ethics course can be valuable, theorizing about ethics contributes little to the understanding of everyday human experience or to preparing medical students for the multifarious ethical dilemmas they will face as physicians. A true foundation in ethics must be predicated on an understanding of human behavior that reflects a wide array of relationships and readily adapts to various perspectives, for this is what is required to develop empathy. Ethics courses drawing on narrative literature can better help students prepare for ethical dilemmas precisely because such literature attaches its readers so forcefully to the concrete and varied would of human events.

The act of reading narrative literature is uniquely suited to the development of what might be called flexible ethical thinking. To grasp the development of character, to tangle with heightening moral crises, and to engage oneself with the story not as one’s own but nevertheless as something recognizable and worthy of attention, readers must use their moral imagination. Giving oneself over to the ethical conflicts in a story requires the abandonment of strictly absolute, inviolate sets of moral principles. Reading literature also demands that the reader adopt another person’s point of view –that of the narrator or a character in a story—and thus requires the ability to depart from one’s personal ethical stance and examine moral issues from new perspectives.

It does not follow that readers, including medical professionals, must relinquish all moral principles, as is the case with situational ethics, in which decisions about ethical choices are made on the basis of intuition ad are entirely relative to the circumstances in which they arise. Such an extremely relativistic stance would have as little benefit for the patient or physician as would a dogmatically absolutist one. Fortunately, the incorporation of narrative literature into the study of ethics, while serving as a corrective to the later stance, need not lead to the former. But it can give us something that is lacking in the traditional philosophical study of ethics—namely, a deeper understanding of human nature that can serve as a foundation for ethical reasoning and allow greater flexibility in the application of moral principles.

With This We can solve most of the question accurately

kchen1994 , I will try.

This question is not as hard as it seems.
Watch the phrasing carefully.

This author is balanced: Medical students need to develop empathy. Current ethics courses fail.
The author wants to supplement medical students' current ethics training with ethics classes that incorporate fiction.

The author is not dogmatic. She wants to supplement the instruction;
and perhaps sweep away a few cobwebs, but this passage is not radical.

POE

3. It can be inferred from the passage that the author would most likely agree with which one of the following statements?

(A) The heavy load of technical coursework in today’s medical schools often keeps them from giving adequate emphasis to courses in medical ethics.
The author says nothing about whether a heavy technical load prevents med students from giving enough emphasis to ethics courses.
-- There is no mention of "too little emphasis" on ethics, for whatever reason.
Eliminate A.

(B) Students learn more about ethics through the use of fiction than through the use of non-fictional readings.
Off topic or too strong.
Students do not learn more about ETHICS from fiction. They learn more about empathy. (off topic)
We can probably infer that students learn more about a particular type of ethics —the compassionate, context-driven kind. But "ethics" is a huge field; we do not know whether their overall knowledge of ethics increases. We know that the author hopes fiction will reshape some of what the students learn. (so too strong - we cannot jump from "more about empathy" to "more about [the entire field of] ethics")
Eliminate B.

(C) The traditional method of ethical training in medical schools should be supplemented or replaced by more direct practical experience with real-life patients in ethically difficult situations.
This answer seems to be the trap answer.
I am not sure why.
We have seen barely any mention of real-life difficulties, let alone "practical training": . . . . ethical dilemmas they will face as physicians.
This passage does not mention practical training at all. Our brain fills in "practical training" because it's logical.

The author said nothing about whether students should have more direct practical training.
The author asserts only that empathy would help in the course of training to become empathetic doctors [however much or little of that training they receive].

(D) The failing of an abstract, philosophical training in ethics can be remedied only by replacing it with a purely narrative-based approach.
Laughably bad. Much too strong. LSAT will rarely use ONLY.
The easiest option to reject. The last paragraph in particular emphasizes that narrative fiction is a corrective, not a revolution.
As noted, the author is balanced.
Eliminate D

(E) Neither scientific training nor traditional philosophical ethics adequately prepares doctors to deal with the emotional dimension of patients’ needs.
Bingo. See my underlined portions.
Critical, but restrained.
"human needs" plus "lack of empathy" = the author is talking about
emotional needs and is worried that med students are robots.

Reading stories about or by others will help med students
to see through another's eyes.

The connection between ethics and empathy is a little strange.

Writers of question 3 are hoping that our minds will allow the answers given to "fill in the gaps."

If in doubt, look back at the words.
The LSAT uses suggestibility. I checked every answer back against the paragraph.
I hope that helps.

warrior1991 , your accuracy is excellent!

I think people who rejected E did so
because the word "emotional" is not used in the passage (and it is in the question).
But "empathy, understanding, different perspectives, human nature, relationships," and
a few other words and phrases all suggest the "emotional needs."

As I said above, the connection between ethics and emotion is weird.
I highlighted the sentences in which the (weird) connection is most evident.

I will try to do what you ask. Passage is below and color coded.

Writing this out makes it look as if checking takes a long time.
It does not. Look for keywords and synonyms for keywords.

Abbreviated version =
Eliminate an answer if one thing is wrong with it.

• The abbreviated version:
A) no mention of "adequate emphasis" or anything like it
B) "more ethics," in context, is conceptually inane (and the piece is about more empathy IN ethics)
C) no mention of MORE direct training or something like it (to my surprise, no mention of direct training at all)
D) ONLY and PURELY? Hooey. Too strong. Last paragraph confirms: narrative should be incorporated and is a corrective
E) By POE, the answer.
In addition, I find "insufficient," [connected to scientific training] and "unprepared" [connected to philosophical ethics].
The piece is about lack of empathy. Empathy is about others' emotions. Fits exactly with the question.

• The thorough version
3. It can be inferred from the passage that the author would most likely agree with which one of the following statements?

(A) The heavy load of technical coursework in today’s medical schools often keeps them from giving adequate emphasis to courses in medical ethics.
Keywords: technical coursework, adequate emphasis, ethics courses

Heavy load of technical coursework =?
-- med students disconnected from the "personal" and ethical aspects
-- "technical" (scientific) part = insufficient skills to deal with "modern ethical dilemmas"

I recall no mention of inadequate emphasis on medical ethics courses.
I will double check.
-- no, there is no mention of
(1) inadequate emphasis on ethics at all, let alone
(2) caused by a heavy course load

(B) Students learn more about ethics through the use of fiction than through the use of non-fictional readings.
keyword: use of fiction

Careful. The author wants to teach more about empathy IN ethics.

Fiction = more empathy, not "more ethics."

What is "more ethics," anyway? That concept is dumb.
Do they learn more rules? More branches of ethics?

Find "use of fiction" Result?
Use of fiction =
1) better prepared for ethical dilemmas. (TOO abstract. I doubled back. See underline).
Better prepared because
2) fiction = flexible thinking
3) fiction requires identification with characters = see from another perspective (part of empathy)
4) UNDERSTANDING human experience. Read: something that is like empathy.

Nonfiction? From (A) we know that the med students are disconnected and not prepared for human interaction.
Use of fiction = more EMPATHY. Not more ethics.

Discard B

(C) The traditional method of ethical training in medical schools should be supplemented or replaced by more direct practical experience with real-life patients in ethically difficult situations.
keywords: "direct" • "practical experience" • "real-life"
On third look, this is the worst answer in terms of support from the passage.

• There is NO mention of training students by way of "direct practical experience with real-life patients in ethically difficult situations"
or something like that scene. Not one mention.

The mind wants to do something with references to the real world such as:
"multifarious ethical dilemmas they will face as physicians"
"remaining empathetic to needs of patients"

The references do not matter. What matters?
The phrases "direct practical experience" and "real-life patients."
You won't find them or any synonyms in the context of training.
• there is NO mention of supplementation or replacement by 'MORE' direct practical experience.

This answer is the worst of the five. (Worry not: it's the trap. 30% chose it)

Eliminate C.

(D) The failing of an abstract, philosophical training in ethics can be remedied only by replacing it with a purely narrative-based approach.
key words: harder to call. Just scan last paragraph quickly - make sure it says what I thought.
Yep. This sentence does not match the balanced tone esp. in last paragraph.

key words become: incorporated and corrective.

I didn't have to check this one, though I did anyway because people trained at law schools become text-obsessed.
For good reason: we would rather not be impaled by professors and then judges, thanks.

No mention of other remedies, so no idea whether fiction is the only way. Too strong anyway.

Nor does author want "purely" narrative based approach.
Rather, fiction should be "incorporated" (mixed in); is a corrective (not a wholesale replacement).
Abstract philosophical training can be valuable.
Used boldface type to indicate places in which this statement is contradicted.

Eliminate D.

(E) Neither scientific training nor traditional philosophical ethics adequately prepares doctors to deal with the emotional dimension of patients’ needs.
keywords: "scientific [or theoretical] training" and "traditional ethics" and "philosophical"

-- too much scientific training = insufficient skills to deal with "modern" ethical problems
-- too much scientific training = students disconnected from the human part of human beings
-- traditional philosophical ethics = some value, conceptual clarity, but "does little to help understanding"
and does not prepare students for "multifarious" situations.

Biggest problem: lack of empathy, which is what doctors need to respond to patients.
Students not adequately prepared to deal with the "emotional dimension of patients' needs."

Correct.

Hope that helps.
Let me know whether you still have questions.

**********
One of the greatest challenges facing medical students today, apart from absorbing volumes of technical information and learning habits of scientific thought, is that of remaining empathetic to the needs of patients in the face of all this rigorous training. Requiring students to immerse themselves completely in medical coursework risks disconnecting [disconnected] them from the personal and ethical aspects of doctoring, and such strictly scientific thinking is insufficient [insufficient skills] for grappling with modern ethical dilemmas. For these reasons, aspiring physicians need to develop new ways of thinking about and interacting with patients. Training in ethics that takes narrative literature as its primary subject is one method of accomplishing this.

Although training in ethics is currently provided by medical schools, this training relies heavily on an abstract, philosophical view of ethics. Although the conceptual clarity provided by a traditional ethics course can be valuable, theorizing about ethics contributes little to the understanding of everyday human experience or to preparing medical students for the multifarious ethical dilemmas they will face as physicians. A true foundation in ethics must be predicated on an understanding of human behavior that reflects a wide array of relationships and readily adapts to various perspectives, for this is what is required to develop empathy. Ethics courses drawing on narrative literature can better help students prepare for ethical dilemmas precisely because such literature attaches its readers so forcefully to the concrete and varied would of human events. [Hmm. Now I need to go back. I will underline and highlight what I missed on first re-scan.]

The act of reading narrative literature is uniquely suited to the development of what might be called flexible ethical thinking. To grasp the development of character, to tangle with heightening moral crises, and to engage oneself with the story not as one’s own but nevertheless as something recognizable and worthy of attention, readers must use their moral imagination. Giving oneself over to the ethical conflicts in a story requires the abandonment of strictly absolute, inviolate sets of moral principles. Reading literature also demands that the reader adopt another person’s point of view –that of the narrator or a character in a story—and thus requires the ability to depart from one’s personal ethical stance and examine moral issues from new perspectives.

It does not follow that readers, including medical professionals, must relinquish all moral principles, as is the case with situational ethics, in which decisions about ethical choices are made on the basis of intuition ad are entirely relative to the circumstances in which they arise. Such an extremely relativistic stance would have as little benefit for the patient or physician as would a dogmatically absolutist one. Fortunately, the incorporation of narrative literature into the study of ethics, while serving as a corrective to the later stance, need not lead to the former. But it can give us something that is lacking in the traditional philosophical study of ethics—namely, a deeper understanding of human nature that can serve as a foundation for ethical reasoning and allow greater flexibility in the application of moral principles.

Edit: Manukaran , you are correct. The answer is D.

This passage



When you see "overall," look at anything that gets left out.
If too much is left out, then the answer is too specific.
Examine verbs. Which verb best describes what the author does "overall"?

(A) To advise medical schools on how to implement a narrative-based approach to ethics in their curricula.
-- The author mentions that narratives should be introduced into ethics courses.
-- Now what do we do with the second and fourth paragraphs?
-- Further, does she, for example, recommend how much of the traditional ethics course be replaced by narrative?
-- Does she recommend the Socratic method to teach narrative?
-- Does she suggest that the students turn in journals?
Implementation is (1) too narrow because it excludes other aspects of the passage; and
(2) too general because implementation itself is never actually described

(B) To argue that the current methods of ethics education are counterproductive to the formation of empathetic doctor-patient relationships.
-- Too narrow and too strong.
--Too strong: current methods are not only counterproductive (they have some value),
--Too narrow and too strong: immersion in too much coursework is the more likely culprit that hinders doctors' empathy.

(C) To argue that the ethical content of narrative literature foreshadows the pitfalls of situational ethics.
-- Too narrow, too ridiculous, and logically opposite
-- situational ethics is mentioned in one paragraph. Too narrow
-- too ridiculous because too narrow.
Pretend you are the author. Why did you waste time in 3/4 of this passage
talking about things that have nothing to do with situational ethics?
-- logically opposite: the author writes that
It does not follow that readers [of narrative literature], including medical professionals, must relinquish all moral principles, as is the case with situational ethics
My emphasis. This option is the worst of the lot.

(D) To propose an approach to ethical training in medical school that will preserve the human dimension of medicine.
The passage:
-- presents a shortcoming in traditional ethical training (latter does not teach empathy)
-- and suggests a narrative-based method [read: APPROACH] to counterbalance the shortcoming
-- so that med students and doctors can develop a deeper understanding of human nature

The narrative-based method is an APPROACH [to ethical training in med school] that the author says will help med students and doctors to understand "everyday human experience" and "human nature."

On the first read, I was really averse to AN approach, which sounded too definitive, and to "preserve" the human dimension of medicine.
In the passage, it still sounds to me as if there is very little (maybe zero) empathy to preserve, but the author is indeed suggesting an approach that is oriented around the human dimension.

On this second look, I think D gets really close and is better than the other options, though I still have issues with "preserve" the human dimension.

(E) To demonstrate the value of a well-designed ethics education for medical students.
-- "demonstrate" is too generic.
-- it's partly a statement of the obvious (who does NOT see the value of a well-designed ethics education?)
-- and partly not specific enough. "Well designed" does not convey the author's continual focus on narrative-based ethics training.

Eliminate E.

The correct answer is D.

The passage is an unusual example of the LSAT RC - easy to grasp passage and very dense GMAT-alike questions.

I don't understand why answer (C) in 5Q.

5. The passage ascribes each of the following characteristics to the use of narrative literature in ethical education EXCEPT:

(A) It tends to avoid the extreme relativism of situational ethics.
(B) It connects students to varied types of human events.
(C) It can help lead medical students to develop new ways of dealing with patients.
(D) It requires students to examine moral issues from new perspectives.
(E) It can help insulate future doctors from the shock of the ethical dilemmas they will confront.

The pasage says: "For these reasons, aspiring physicians need to develop new ways of thinking about and interacting with patients. Training in ethics that takes narrative literature as its primary subject is one method of accomplishing this.

popovarseniy , I'm glad that you don't understand why C is the answer because C is not the answer.
Nice catch. +1 You are correct. The answer is E and I have changed it. I'm sure that the error was just a posting mishap.

All answers except E have support.

(A) It tends to avoid the extreme relativism of situational ethics.
. . . situational ethics . . . [is] an extremely relativistic stance . . . Fortunately, the incorporation of narrative literature into the study of ethics, . . . need not lead to the [extremely relativistic stance of situational ethics].

(B) It connects students to varied types of human events.
Ethics courses drawing on narrative literature can better help students prepare for ethical dilemmas precisely because such literature attaches its readers so forcefully to the concrete and varied world of human events.

(C) It can help lead medical students to develop new ways of dealing with patients.
You selected the correct passage; I highlighted it above.

(D) It requires students to examine moral issues from new perspectives.
Reading literature also demands that the reader adopt another person’s point of view –that of the narrator or a character in a story—and thus requires the ability to depart from one’s personal ethical stance and examine moral issues from new perspectives.

(E) It can help insulate future doctors from the shock of the ethical dilemmas they will confront.

Because correct answers on the GMAT and the LSAT regularly use words that are not in the passage, if there is time, it pays to check.

Does the passage contain words that suggest "insulation" from the "shock" that doctors will experience when they confront ethical dilemmas?
No.

-- The author never suggests that doctors will shocked, shaken, or surprised by ethical dilemmas they will confront. (And overall, the subtle suggestion is that doctors are both too detached to experience shock and too mechanically trained to allow for the possibility that a situation they face is not well-served by their mechanical rules.)
-- Nor does the author suggest that fiction will "insulate" doctors from this shock. Fiction and empathy may help doctors recognize the agony of another person, but "insulation from shock" is a phrase out of nowhere.

The answer to #5 is E.

gmat1393 - +1 for raising the issue. The better answer is D.

I looked at it again.
Wow. I didn't miss a single RC question on the LSAT . . . better here than there.

The better answer is D.

I mapped the passage again.

Paragraph 1: greatest challenge for med students: stay empathetic to patients

Paragraph 2: Current ethics training contributes little to the understanding of everyday human experience and is not true foundation from which to develop empathy.
Ethics training based on narrative literature is better at preparing students to deal with the human element

Paragraph 3: narrative literature creates or requires flexible ethical thinking, moral imagination, and ability to adopt another person's perspective

Paragraph 4: ethics training based on narrative literature is not hopelessly relativistic (i.e. NOT like situational ethics); should incorporate narrative literature into traditional training to give students a deeper understanding of human nature.


On second look, answer E is actually way off: as I read the sentence now, I think,

"Wait a minute. This passage
-- presents a shortcoming in traditional ethical training (latter does not teach empathy)
-- and suggests a narrative-based method [read: APPROACH] to counterbalance the shortcoming
-- so that med students and doctors can develop a deeper understanding of human nature

The narrative-based method is an APPROACH [to ethical training in med school] that the author says will help med students and doctors to understand "everyday human experience" and "human nature."

On the first read, I was really averse to AN approach, which sounded too definitive, and to "preserve" the human dimension of medicine.
In the passage, it still sounds to me as if there is very little (maybe zero) empathy to preserve, but the author is indeed suggesting an approach that is oriented around the human dimension.

On this second look, I think D gets really close and is better than the other options, though I still have issues with "preserve" the human dimension.

Now option E . . .
-- No. On second look, it's partly a statement of the obvious (who does NOT see the value of a well-designed ethics education?)
-- and partly not specific enough. "Well designed" does not convey the author's continual focus on narrative-based ethics training.

Eliminate E,

The correct answer is D.

I will edit my earlier post.

Hi everyone,
Very lengthy passage even for LSAT's standards.
Got 4/6 correct in 14 minutes, including 5:15 minutes to read and 8:45 minutes to answer the questions.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



P1

In the first paragraph the author presents a problem that medical students are facing now: lack of empathy. Because of such lack they cannot deal with current ethical dilemmas. Lastly the author suggests a solution to this problem: training students in ethics through the usage of narrative literature.

Purpose: To present a problem and suggest a solution.


P2

Here the author admits that there are training in ethics in some school but she condemns the abstract way in which they are conducted. Then the author proceeds by proposing training in ethics based on narrative literature so that physicians get a more concrete preparation and develop empathy.

Purpose: To condemn current trainings in ethic and to suggest a more concrete approach to the subject



P3

In paragraph 3 the author resents one of the benefits of the usage of narrative literature in training ethics: flexible ethical thinking. As a matter of fact reading narrative literature helps to put yourself in other people shoes and hence to be more empathetic with the person in front of you.

Purpose: To present one of the benefits of using narrative literature in training ethics: flexible ethical thinking




P4

In the last paragraph the author refutes one of the possible consequences that could be related with the approach previously described, that is developing a too extreme relativistic morality. The author in fact claims that such development would be of no value for physicians and patients. Lastly the author clams that reading narrative literature can give a better understanding of human nature and a flexible morality.

Purpose: To refute a possible consequence of reading narrative literature and to present the benefits of such practice




Main point

To present a new approach to training ethics, detailing the benefits of such approach.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


It's a great day to be alive!

Ques 1 option A states:

Training in ethics that incorporates narrative literature would better cultivate flexible ethical thinking and increase medical students’ capacity for empathetic patient care as compared with the traditional approach of medical schools to such training.

Does the passage mention Patient Care specifically anywhere? I rejected this option because of this term.

It says "remaining empathetic to the needs of patients in the face of all this rigorous training"

would needs of patients not be diff from patient CARE. I chose E because of this.

Any help?

I eliminated "D" bcoz of the word medicine, the appropriate word should have been medical training, IMO.

VeritasKarishma GMATNinja

In option D - What does human dimension of medicine referring to ?
Author purpose is to propose an approach to ethical training but how can we know it will preserve human dimension of medicine.
Please explain.