Events & Promotions
|
|
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.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
12 Feb 2020, 01:14
Kudos
Bookmarks
C
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
15%
(low)
Question Stats:
83% (01:49) correct
17%
(02:17)
wrong
based on 412
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
That long-term cigarette smoking can lead to health problems including cancer and lung disease is a scientifically well-established fact. Contrary to what many people seem to believe, however, it is not necessary to deny this fact in order to reject the view that tobacco companies should be held either morally or legally responsible for the poor health of smokers. After all, excessive consumption of candy undeniably leads to such health problems as tooth decay, but no one seriously believes that candy eaters who get cavities should be able to sue candy manufacturers.
The main point of the argument is that
(A) no one should feel it necessary to deny the scientifically well-established fact that long-term cigarette smoking can lead to health problems
(B) people who get cavities should not be able to sue candy manufacturers
(C) the fact that smokers’ health problems can be caused by their smoking is not enough to justify holding tobacco companies either legally or morally responsible for those problems
(D) excessive consumption of candy will lead to health problems just as surely as long-term cigarette smoking will
(E) if candy manufacturers were held responsible for tooth decay among candy eaters then tobacco companies should also be held responsible for health problems suffered by smokers
The main point of the argument is that
(A) no one should feel it necessary to deny the scientifically well-established fact that long-term cigarette smoking can lead to health problems
(B) people who get cavities should not be able to sue candy manufacturers
(C) the fact that smokers’ health problems can be caused by their smoking is not enough to justify holding tobacco companies either legally or morally responsible for those problems
(D) excessive consumption of candy will lead to health problems just as surely as long-term cigarette smoking will
(E) if candy manufacturers were held responsible for tooth decay among candy eaters then tobacco companies should also be held responsible for health problems suffered by smokers
15 Feb 2020, 16:04
Kudos
Bookmarks
Bunuel
Correct answer: C
(A): Incorrect. The argument does not concern whether people might feel it necessary to deny the scientific fact that smoking is hazardous. Rather, the argument concludes that since other products can be hazardous too, denying the scientific fact is not necessary in order to make an argument against the sanction of tobacco companies.
(B): Incorrect. The argument concerns tobacco companies by making an analogy to candy companies. The argument concludes that if candy companies cannot be held accountable for the damage that candy consumption causes, the same reasoning could be applied to tobacco companies.
(C): Correct. The argument makes the analogy between smoking and candy consumption to conclude that the dangers posed by smoking are not sufficient in themselves to sanction tobacco companies.
(D): Incorrect. (D) is not the main conclusion of the argument but a premise that supports it. Further, the argument does not consider whether the excessive consumption of candy will "just as surely" lead to deleterious health effects, just that it undeniably does.
(E): Incorrect. (E) makes a normative conclusion: what should happen if something else happens. Rather, the argument merely concerns how one should respond to the argument that tobacco companies be sanctioned, stating that they need not make an argument about the veracity of the scientific claims.
25 Mar 2020, 22:38
Kudos
Bookmarks
Bunuel
Fact: Long-term cigarette smoking can lead to health problems including cancer and lung disease.
View: Tobacco companies should be held either morally or legally responsible for the poor health of smokers
Author's view (opposed to what many people believe): It is not necessary to deny this fact in order to reject the view.
This means you don't have to prove that long term smoking does not lead to health problems to say that tobacco companies should not be held responsible. Even if the fact holds, you can still say that tobacco companies should not be held responsible. So the fact is not enough to justify holding tobacco companies responsible for the problems.
After all, you do not hold candy companies responsible for cavities.
Basically, the argument is saying that just like overeating candies causes cavities but no one holds candy companies responsible for that, problems caused by long term use of cigarettes should not be pinned on cigarette companies.
Answer (C)
