Last visit was: 17 Jul 2025, 22:00 It is currently 17 Jul 2025, 22:00
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
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 17 Jul 2025
Posts: 102,604
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 98,220
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 102,604
Kudos: 742,316
 [82]
9
Kudos
Add Kudos
72
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
CrackverbalGMAT
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 03 Oct 2013
Last visit: 17 July 2025
Posts: 4,847
Own Kudos:
8,646
 [16]
Given Kudos: 225
Affiliations: CrackVerbal
Location: India
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,847
Kudos: 8,646
 [16]
12
Kudos
Add Kudos
4
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
KarishmaB
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 17 Jul 2025
Posts: 16,111
Own Kudos:
74,378
 [5]
Given Kudos: 475
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,111
Kudos: 74,378
 [5]
4
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
User avatar
Archit3110
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2017
Last visit: 17 July 2025
Posts: 8,350
Own Kudos:
4,830
 [4]
Given Kudos: 243
Status:You learn more from failure than from success.
Location: India
Concentration: Sustainability, Marketing
GMAT Focus 1: 545 Q79 V79 DI73
GPA: 4
WE:Marketing (Energy)
GMAT Focus 1: 545 Q79 V79 DI73
Posts: 8,350
Kudos: 4,830
 [4]
4
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
IMO E stands out of the given options to weaken Susan claims of value..
she has not given reason on how experiment on animals could help in finding cure for human ailments where as the testing of consumer products is given by susan as a justifiable argument


Bunuel
Susan: Those who oppose experimentation on animals do not properly value the preservation of human life. Although animal suffering is unfortunate, it is justifiable if it can lead to cures for human ailments.

Melvin: But much animal experimentation involves testing of ordinary consumer products such as soaps, dyes, and cosmetics.

Susan: These experiments are justifiable on the same grounds, since cleanliness, convenience, and beauty are worthwhile human values deserving of support.

Which of the following is the best statement of the logical flaw in Susan’s argument?


(A) Her claim that animal experimentation is justifiable if it supports human values contradicts her claim that such experimentation is justifiable only if it leads to cures for human ailments.

(B) She places a higher value on human cleanliness, convenience, and beauty than she does on the preservation of animal life.

(C) She uses the word “value” in two different senses.

(D) She assumes that all ordinary consumer products aid in the preservation of human life.

(E) She fails to show how mere support for human values actually preserves human lives.
avatar
Chandan5793
avatar
Current Student
Joined: 01 Mar 2019
Last visit: 27 Jun 2021
Posts: 12
Own Kudos:
10
 [3]
Given Kudos: 43
Location: India
GMAT 1: 640 Q48 V29
GMAT 2: 660 Q49 V32
GPA: 4
GMAT 2: 660 Q49 V32
Posts: 12
Kudos: 10
 [3]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
Susan: Those who oppose experimentation on animals do not properly value the preservation of human life. Although animal suffering is unfortunate, it is justifiable if it can lead to cures for human ailments.

Melvin: But much animal experimentation involves testing of ordinary consumer products such as soaps, dyes, and cosmetics.

Susan: These experiments are justifiable on the same grounds, since cleanliness, convenience, and beauty are worthwhile human values deserving of support.

Which of the following is the best statement of the logical flaw in Susan’s argument?


(A) Her claim that animal experimentation is justifiable if it supports human values contradicts her claim that such experimentation is justifiable only if it leads to cures for human ailments.

(B) She places a higher value on human cleanliness, convenience, and beauty than she does on the preservation of animal life.

(C) She uses the word “value” in two different senses.

(D) She assumes that all ordinary consumer products aid in the preservation of human life.

(E) She fails to show how mere support for human values actually preserves human lives.


These experiments are justifiable on the same grounds : The grounds are that of her argument only , i.e "it is justifiable if it can lead to cures for human ailments."
We can conclude that Susan considers cure for human ailments and supporting human values (by cleanliness, convenience and beauty) as the same thing.

But she hasn't stated any reasons behind this conclusion. Therefore option (E).
What do you think?
avatar
mehro023
avatar
Current Student
Joined: 08 Nov 2019
Last visit: 10 Dec 2021
Posts: 55
Own Kudos:
39
 [4]
Given Kudos: 1,158
Location: United States (MN)
Concentration: Finance, International Business
GMAT 1: 580 Q47 V22
GMAT 2: 650 Q49 V29 (Online)
GMAT 3: 680 Q49 V33
GMAT 4: 710 Q49 V38
GMAT 5: 730 Q50 V40
GPA: 3.29
WE:Architecture (Other)
Products:
GMAT 5: 730 Q50 V40
Posts: 55
Kudos: 39
 [4]
4
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja

Although i chose E, i was conflicted between E and A. I disregarded A because A says "such experimentation is justifiable ONLY if it leads to cures for human ailments" whereas Susan never said animal suffering is justifiable ONLY if it leads to cures.

Am I right in my thought process ? What other reason is justified in disregarding A.

Thanks,
-K
User avatar
DanishJamil
Joined: 14 Feb 2024
Last visit: 19 Aug 2024
Posts: 1
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 17
Posts: 1
Kudos: 1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Literally confuse at option A's wording "ONLY". Need your elaboration....

Posted from my mobile device
User avatar
himanshi1172
Joined: 14 Jun 2022
Last visit: 29 Jun 2025
Posts: 10
Given Kudos: 261
GMAT Focus 1: 655 Q84 V85 DI79
Products:
GMAT Focus 1: 655 Q84 V85 DI79
Posts: 10
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I'd like to offer another consideration.
While the fact that the argument doesn't mention "only" is one of the reasons its wrong, the essence of the argument is the jump Susan makes in justifying testing of ordinary products on the SAME grounds as she justifies experimentation for cure of ailments. Say we removed the word "Only"

Revised option:

- Her claim that animal experimentation is justifiable if it supports human values contradicts her claim that such experimentation is justifiable if it leads to cures for human ailments.

IMO this still doesn't make this option a correct choice!

"animal suffering is unfortunate, it is justifiable if it can lead to cures for human ailments" - this claim IMO, as suggested in this option, is NOT contradicted by the claim " animal experimentation is justifiable if it supports human values " This is because, the latter could also have been a "sufficient" condition independent of this justification. It isn't necessary for experimentation to be justified by its ability to cure ailments :) but yes its sufficient.

The flaw as I mentioned earlier, is her justifying experimentation of consumer products on the same grounds without establishing how it is curing ailments/preserving human life. This is of course tackled by E
KarishmaB
Bunuel
Susan: Those who oppose experimentation on animals do not properly value the preservation of human life. Although animal suffering is unfortunate, it is justifiable if it can lead to cures for human ailments.

Melvin: But much animal experimentation involves testing of ordinary consumer products such as soaps, dyes, and cosmetics.

Susan: These experiments are justifiable on the same grounds, since cleanliness, convenience, and beauty are worthwhile human values deserving of support.

Which of the following is the best statement of the logical flaw in Susan’s argument?


(A) Her claim that animal experimentation is justifiable if it supports human values contradicts her claim that such experimentation is justifiable only if it leads to cures for human ailments.

(B) She places a higher value on human cleanliness, convenience, and beauty than she does on the preservation of animal life.

(C) She uses the word “value” in two different senses.

(D) She assumes that all ordinary consumer products aid in the preservation of human life.

(E) She fails to show how mere support for human values actually preserves human lives.

Responding to a pm:


(A) Her claim that animal experimentation is justifiable if it supports human values contradicts her claim that such experimentation is justifiable only if it leads to cures for human ailments.

She does not claim that "experimentation is justifiable ONLY IF it leads to cures for human ailments."
She says "it is justifiable IF it can lead to cures for human ailments."
So she gives a sufficient condition, not a necessary one. So this is not a part of her argument so it cannot be the flaw in her argument.

(B) She places a higher value on human cleanliness, convenience, and beauty than she does on the preservation of animal life.

Our values and ethos are our own. We cannot call one group's values flaws.

(C) She uses the word “value” in two different senses.

She does use the word "value" in two different senses. The word "value" can be logically used in both senses. That is not a flaw.
"They don't value human life" and "These are worthwhile human values" and two different uses of the word and both are justified in the way they are used. There is nothing wrong or ambiguous here.

(D) She assumes that all ordinary consumer products aid in the preservation of human life.

She does not assume so in her argument. Nowhere does she imply that consumer products aid in the preservation of human life.

(E) She fails to show how mere support for human values actually preserves human lives.

Correct.
Her argument is that "Those who oppose experimentation on animals do not properly value the preservation of human life" and "These experiments are justifiable on the same grounds, since cleanliness, convenience, and beauty are worthwhile human values deserving of support." When she says that "these experiments are justifiable on the same grounds," she needs to extend her argument to show how it ties up with "preservation of human life" aspect such as

Without cleanliness, humans are prone to life threatening diseases or something similar. She needed to tie the human values to "preservation of human life" for her argument to make sense.

Answer (E)

Here are some discussions on method questions:

Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7359 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
235 posts