|
|
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.
04 Aug 2019, 00:22
Kudos
Bookmarks
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
45%
(medium)
Question Stats:
68% (01:59) correct
32%
(02:09)
wrong
based on 421
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Ross assumed that human beings in the state of nature are characterized by a feeling of sympathy toward their fellow humans and other living creatures. In order to explain the existence of social ills, such as the exploitation of some human beings by other humans, Ross maintained that our natural feelings are crushed under the weight of unsympathetic social institutions.
Ross's argument described above would be most strengthened if it could be explained how
(A) creatures naturally characterized by feelings of sympathy for all living creatures could create unsympathetic social institutions
(B) we can restructure our social institutions so that they will foster our natural sympathies for one another
(C) modern reformers might lead the way to a life which is not inconsistent with the ideals of the state of nature
(D) non-exploitive conduct could arise in conditions of the state of nature
(E) a return to the state of nature from modern society might be accomplished
Ross's argument described above would be most strengthened if it could be explained how
(A) creatures naturally characterized by feelings of sympathy for all living creatures could create unsympathetic social institutions
(B) we can restructure our social institutions so that they will foster our natural sympathies for one another
(C) modern reformers might lead the way to a life which is not inconsistent with the ideals of the state of nature
(D) non-exploitive conduct could arise in conditions of the state of nature
(E) a return to the state of nature from modern society might be accomplished
19 Aug 2019, 06:19
Kudos
Bookmarks
1º Premise: feeling of sympathy for human beings are other living creatures is something natural
2º Premise: to explain social ills, unsympathetic social institutions are the reason
(A) creatures naturally characterized by feelings of sympathy for all living creatures could create unsympathetic social institutions
This sounds a supporting premise because 2º premise doesn't clarify that unsympathetic social institutions can be created. This option says that they can be created so it strengthens the argument
(B) we can restructure our social institutions so that they will foster our natural sympathies for one another
This has nothing to do with the argument because it is still possible that social institutions are unsympathetic, and this statement refers to a future possible scenario
C) modern reformers might lead the way to a life which is not inconsistent with the ideals of the state of nature
This has nothing to do with the argument because it is still possible that social institutions are unsympathetic, and this statement refers to a future possible scenario
(D) non-exploitive conduct could arise in conditions of the state of nature
This weakens the argument actually because if under the state of nature, non-exploitive conduct could arise, it weakens the fact of the existence of unsympathetic social institutions
(E) a return to the state of nature from modern society might be accomplished
Modern society?. Has nothing to do with the argument
OPTION A
2º Premise: to explain social ills, unsympathetic social institutions are the reason
(A) creatures naturally characterized by feelings of sympathy for all living creatures could create unsympathetic social institutions
This sounds a supporting premise because 2º premise doesn't clarify that unsympathetic social institutions can be created. This option says that they can be created so it strengthens the argument
(B) we can restructure our social institutions so that they will foster our natural sympathies for one another
This has nothing to do with the argument because it is still possible that social institutions are unsympathetic, and this statement refers to a future possible scenario
C) modern reformers might lead the way to a life which is not inconsistent with the ideals of the state of nature
This has nothing to do with the argument because it is still possible that social institutions are unsympathetic, and this statement refers to a future possible scenario
(D) non-exploitive conduct could arise in conditions of the state of nature
This weakens the argument actually because if under the state of nature, non-exploitive conduct could arise, it weakens the fact of the existence of unsympathetic social institutions
(E) a return to the state of nature from modern society might be accomplished
Modern society?. Has nothing to do with the argument
OPTION A
10 Jan 2020, 11:43
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Explanation
Although we do not want to argue theology, perhaps a point taken from that discipline will make this question more accessible: “If God is only good, from where does evil come?” Rousseau, at least as far as his argument is characterized here, faced a similar problem.
If humans are by nature sympathetic, what is the source of their nonsympathetic social institutions? (A) poses this critical question. The remaining choices each commit the same fundamental error.
Rousseau describes a situation. The paragraph never suggests that he proposed a solution. Perhaps Rousseau considered the problem of modern society irremediable.
The correct answer is (A).
Although we do not want to argue theology, perhaps a point taken from that discipline will make this question more accessible: “If God is only good, from where does evil come?” Rousseau, at least as far as his argument is characterized here, faced a similar problem.
If humans are by nature sympathetic, what is the source of their nonsympathetic social institutions? (A) poses this critical question. The remaining choices each commit the same fundamental error.
Rousseau describes a situation. The paragraph never suggests that he proposed a solution. Perhaps Rousseau considered the problem of modern society irremediable.
The correct answer is (A).
