Senator Woods: The government's funding program for the sciences

Question

Senator Woods: The government's funding program for the sciences is intended to encourage the creation of works of scientific excellence. However, a government-funded science program can never reflect the scientific conscience of the scientist because scientists, like anyone else who accepts financial support, will inevitably try to please those who control the distribution of that support. Thus, government funding of the sciences is not only a waste of taxpayers‖ money, but it also cannot lead to the creation of works of true scientific excellence.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which Senator Wood’s argument is based?

(A) Once a scientist has produced works of true scientific excellence, he or she will never accept government funding. 
(B) A work of science that does not reflect the scientific conscience of the scientist cannot be a work of true scientific excellence. 
(C) Distribution of government funds for the sciences is based on a broad agreement as to what constitutes scientific excellence. 
(D)Many taxpayers are concerned about the purposes for which their tax money is utilized. 
(E)The government bodies that control scientific funding will discourage scientists from abiding by their scientific conscience.

stne · Answer

1) Government's fund -> intended to encourage the creation of works of scientific excellence
 2)Government-funded science program  (a)  =  (b) can never reflect the  scientific conscience  of the scientist .
 3)Government funded science program  (a)  =  (c) cannot lead to the creation of works of true scientific excellence.
 
From 2 and 3 :  If a=b and a=c then b=c

So from statement 2 and 3 above we can clearly see that the Senator is linking ( Assuming ) : (b)  Something that does not reflect the  scientific conscience  of the scientist  (c)  cannot lead to the creation of works of true scientific excellence.

(A) Not linking lack of scientific conscience to lack of true scientific excellence. INCORRECT.
(B) EXACTLY what we are looking for. seems Correct. KEEP.
(C)Not linking lack of scientific conscience to lack of true scientific excellence. INCORRECT.
(D) irrelevant , Not linking lack of scientific conscience to lack of true scientific excellence. INCORRECT.
(E))Not linking lack of scientific conscience to lack of true scientific excellence. INCORRECT.

Correct option option B

Ans- B

Hope it's clear.

sauravleo123 · Answer

This is one of those assumption questions in which you can actually predict the answer quite easily. In this case it should be- To create works of true scientific excellence, scientists must use their scientific conscience. 
Lets look for an answer choice based on the above assumption.
A. Irrelevant
B. Correct. Exactly in line with our pre thinking.
C. Out of scope. What constitutes scientific excellence is irrelevant.
D. Taxpayers concern does not affect the conclusion.
E. This does not need to be assumed. The argument still works even if you negate it. The government body does not need to discourage the scientists, the argument says the moment scientists accept funding, they cannot create work that would reflect true scientific conscience.
B is correct.

aggvipul · Answer

Loved this explanation. Amazing

prakhar992 · Answer

It is inference. I do no see assumption.

RahulHGGmat · Answer

Please help me with this as I am unable to understand how the negation of E still works.

Request you to please elaborate on options B and E.

SushantSaini · Answer

GMATNinja   egmat   CrackVerbal

Please explain choices B & E

CrackverbalGMAT · Answer

The argument states that if funded by the government, true scientific excellence cannot happen. This is stated because funding reduces the amount of scientific conscience reflected in the work of the scientist. Therefore, the author assumes that scientific conscience is required to produce a work of true scientific excellence.

(A) This is not supported by the argument.  Eliminate 
 
(B) On negation, this answer choice breaks the argument: A work of science that does not reflect the scientific conscience of the scientist can be the work of true scientific excellence. If the above sentence holds true, works of true excellence can be created, and funding is not wasted.  Therefore, this is the correct answer.

(C) This is a vague answer choice that does not specify the terms of the agreement. Negation does not break the argument.  Eliminate

(D) This is a broad statement how many is many' Secondly, it does not matter whether taxpayers are concerned about how their tax money is utilized even if they are not concerned, it could still be a waste of tax money.  Eliminate

(E) This is an extreme answer choice. 
It is stated in the premise that - “scientists, like anyone else who accepts financial support, will inevitably try to please those who control the distribution of that support”
Even if the government bodies do not discourage scientists from abiding by their conscience, the scientists may themselves feel obliged to the financial supporter.  Eliminate

Hope this helps!

kovid231 · Answer

Senator Woods: The government's funding program for the sciences is intended to encourage the creation of works of scientific excellence. However, a government-funded science program can never reflect the scientific conscience of the scientist because scientists, like anyone else who accepts financial support, will inevitably try to please those who control the distribution of that support. Thus, government funding of the sciences is not only a waste of taxpayers‖ money, but it also cannot lead to the creation of works of true scientific excellence.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which Senator Wood's argu-ment is based?

Q.type: Assumption
POA: 
1. Find conclusion
2. Read premise again
3. Look at options and eliminate WAs. These will be 1. Weakening statement 2. Out of Scope/Story: New information, Effect of conclusion 3. Not related to link between premise and conclusion
4. Correct answer: No new information and will have elements of the sentence

Let's look at the passage:
Author concludes: Govt. funding of science will not lead to the creation of works of true scientific excellence. (he also mentions that it is a waste of taxpayers money, but that is not the point the author is trying to make. The meaning of the idiom 'Not only X but also Y' is that Y statement is the surprising and new thing.)
Author argues that since scientist will try to please those who control the funds, the scientist will NEVER create work that shows his scientific conscience.
The author has linked scientific conscience to TRUE work of scientific excellence.

The assumption will be a link between both. Let's see.

A. Once a scientist has produced works of true scientific excellence, he or she will never accept government funding.
This is additional information and it doesn't link the gap between premise and conclusion in the passage above. Hence, incorrect.

B. A work of science that does not reflect the scientific conscience of the scientist cannot be a work of true scientific excellence.
Okay, it talks about both conscience and work of excellence, let's keep this. Please note, while solving at this point i haven't fully comprehended the answer. I can see there's merit in keeping this.

C. Distribution of government funds for the sciences is based on a broad agreement as to what constitutes scientific excellence.

1. We are not concerned with Distribution of funds
2. This can't act as a bridge
This is OS.

D. Many taxpayers are concerned about the purposes for which their tax money is utilized.
Again, OS.

E. The government bodies that control scientific funding will discourage scien-tists from abiding by their scientific conscience.
Interesting answer. Let's keep this too and then compare both shortlisted answer options.

B. A work of science that does not reflect the scientific conscience of the scientist cannot be a work of true scientific excellence.
This sounds correct as it addresses the link we were establishing

E. The government bodies that control scientific funding will discourage scien-tists from abiding by their scientific conscience.
We can't be sure about this, that the govt. bodies will discourage (again, in CR, such keywords come of help)

Senator Woods: The government's funding program for the sciences

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Senator Woods: The government's funding program for the sciences

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards