For the first time, an earth-like planet has beendiscovered. This plan

Stimulus :
There is greatest chance for life to exist outside our solar system, since there are earth-like planets in other solar systems.
However, the logical gap is the connection between the earth-like conditions and likelihood of the existence of life.

A. Extraterrestrial organisms are likely to appear in forms similar to terrestrial ones. --> Out of scope

B. Life cannot exist on the other planets of our solar system. --> Too extreme

C. Life will always occur wherever earth-like planets exist. --> Too extreme

D. Life is most likely to arise under earth-like conditions. --> Correct, negate the statement and see how the argument falls apart

E. Life from other kinds of planets is too difficult to detect. --> Out of scope


Hence, D.

IMO B
A: The comparison between extraterrestrial organisms and terrestrial organisms is out of scope
B: If we negate this answer choice, we can weaken the conclusion. Hence, the best option Correct answer
C: always: extreme and this negating this option doesn't change our conclusion
D: Out of scope
E: Out of scope

KAPLAN OFFICIAL SOLUTION:

Correct Choice: (D)

The conclusion is that “the greatest chance for life to exist is outside our solar system” because we know that there are earth-like planets in other solar systems. To link evidence and conclusion, we must assume that there is a connection between the presence of earth-like conditions and an increased chance for the existence of life. So choice (D) is correct.

Choice (A) is out of scope, since we’re concerned only with whether life exists, not what form it takes.

Choices (B) and (C) are too extreme (note the strong wording: “cannot exist” and “will always”).

Choice (E) is out of scope, since we’re not concerned with detecting life, but with whether it exists.

hi there TaN1213 and Priyadarshana

Let me try to explain why your answer choices turned out to be incorrect. so lets read whole statement once again and than analyze each sentence.

"For the first time, an earth-like planet has been discovered. This planet is orbiting another star. Since we can now say with confidence that at least some of the 100 billion other stars like our sun may have planets like earth, the greatest chance for extraterrestrial life to exist is outside our solar system".

Now lets break it down into sepereate sentences:

#1. For the first time, an earth-like planethas been discovered".

Notice here a key word "earth-like planet" Earth-like planet means it has certain natural conditions similar to Earth.

#2.This planet is orbiting another star".

Notice the key word "this planet- same as "earth-like planet" so this Earth like planet orbits some other star.
if you prethink without reading the third sentence, you will see some connection and you can make an assumption here....like this "looks like there is some effect hmm intereting ! Now why dont you reorder the above two sentences. i.e.

---> 1.The Earth like planet is orbiting another star. 2. For the first time, an earth-like planet has been discovered. Assumption ?


#3. "Since we can now say with confidence that at least some of the 100 billion other stars like our sun may have planets like earth, the greatest chance for extraterrestrial life to exist is outside our solar system"

The third sentence concludes that its actually due to the effect of earth like planet orbiting other star,there will be at least some of the 100 billion other stars like our sun may have planets like earth greatest chance for extraterrestrial life to exist is outside our solar system".


The argument above assumes which of the following?

Now the question asks about making an assumption. no need to focus on conclusion, focus on whole argument. So what do we talk mainly about ? About Earth like planets orbiting other stars, creating similar earth like conditions on other planets/stars. if there are similar earth like conditions then there is greater chance to see extraterrestrial life

now lets compare B vs D


B. Life cannot exist on the other planets of our solar system. ( B is saying totally opposite thing. because we know that Earth like planets orbiting other stars, create similar earth like conditions on other planets, thus there is greatest chance for extraterrestrial life to exist is outside our solar system. moreover whole argument revolves around earth like planets, and not about solar system).


D. Life is most likely to arise under earth-like conditions. Exactly ! (because we know that Earth like planets orbiting other stars, create similar earth like conditions on other planets, thus there is greatest chance for extraterrestrial life )

have a great day !

My 2 cents:

A. Irrelevant. Absolutely no comparison between terrestrial and Extraterrestrial

B. If we negate B. Life can exist on other planets of our solar system. However our conclusion "the greatest chance for extraterrestrial life to exist is outside our solar system." still stands strong. It doesn't break

C. Negate C. "Life will NOT always occur wherever earth-like planets exist.". our conclusion "the greatest chance for extraterrestrial life to exist is outside our solar system." still stands strong. It doesn't break

D. Negate D. "Life is not most likely to arise under earth-like conditions.". Hmmmm.. this breaks our conclusion which says that "the greatest chance for extraterrestrial life........ "

E. Irrelevant


Hit Kudos if you liked my post

Hope you are working hard. Let’s try to solve this question.
We are supposed to identify the assumption present in the argument. Now, an assumption will essentially try to bridge the gap that exists between the conclusion and the premise. So let’s deconstruct the argument and identify the conclusion and premise in the argument.
The premise is suggested by the premise indicator- Since we can now say with confidence that at least some of the 100 billion other stars like our sun may have planets like earth
Conclusion is the greatest chance for extraterrestrial life to exist is outside our solar system.
The assumption will connect the gap between planets like earth and extra terrestrial life.
Let’s explore the options
A- Out of scope
B and C are extreme options.
D – This choice serves as the correct answer as it helps to connect the life possible in extra terrestrial place as it has conditions similar like Earth.
E-irrelevant
Hope it helps.
Keep striving hard.
All the best!!
PythaGURUS Faculty Team

For the first time, an earth-like planet has been discovered. Since this planet is orbiting another star, the greatest chance for extraterrestrial life to exist is outside our solar system.

The argument above assumes which of the following?

A) Extraterrestrial organisms are likely to appear in forms similar to terrestrial ones.
B) Life cannot exist on the other planets of our solar system.
C) Life will always occur wherever earth-like planets exist.
D) Life is most likely to arise under earth-like conditions.
E) Life from other kinds of planets is too difficult to detect.

themindful

Please search on the forum before posting any new questions.
Merged posts.

Premise : For the first time, an earth-like planet has been discovered.
Premise : This planet is orbiting another star.
Conclusion : Since we can now say with confidence that at least some of the 100 billion other stars like our sun may have planets like earth, the greatest chance for extraterrestrial life to exist is outside our solar system.

Pre-thinking : The statement is assuming that if earth-like planet exists, there is a chance that extraterrestrial life may exist on the earth-like planet.

A. Extraterrestrial organisms are likely to appear in forms similar to terrestrial ones. : Out of scope
B. Life cannot exist on the other planets of our solar system. : This assumption is exactly opposite and it is too strong.
C. Life will always occur wherever earth-like planets exist. : This is too strong.
D. Life is most likely to arise under earth-like conditions. : This matches with our pre-thinking.
E. Life from other kinds of planets is too difficult to detect. : This is again Out of scope.

Answer D

Hi there. I am new here. I strongly believe that we are not the only civilization in the hole Universe. We cant explore and assert that there is no life on any other planet in our solar system so how can we be sure that there is no life somewhere else in the huge Universe?

But how does it relate to the question. For this question, we need to solve the CR question by using the information provided in the statement only. We should not use any information from outside. So, instead of thinking that there is a life outside earth or not, let's try to discuss on this critical reasoning question.

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.