The question whether intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe

Shouldn't the answer be Option C?
(A) showing the claim to be irrelevant to the issue at hand -Out of Scope
(B) citing examples that fail to fit proposed definition of “intelligent life” - totally irrelevant as there are no examples
(C) claiming that “intelligent life” cannot be adequately defined - the best choice
(D) arguing that the claim, if acted on, would be counterproductive - Does not fit the passage and is too strong and extreme
(E) maintaining that the claim is not supported by the available evidence - Irrelevant
Experts sayantanc2k mikemcgarry Please guide
Also buddy Sasindran ManasviHP please recheck OA once

HiGMATNinja sir please guide

According to me answer must be Option C. The stimulus mentions whether intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is certainly imprecise. Also it is difficult to define "Intelligent life" in a precise manner. The passage concludes: we cannot define “intelligent life” in some more precise way and we will find intelligent life only if we leave our definitions open.

Even I chose C. Can anyone explain why it is incorrect?

The stimulus challenges the claim that we can answer the question about the existence of intelligent life elsewhere by defining it more precisely. It argues that we must leave our definitions open to new possibilities if we are to find and recognize intelligent life in the universe. By defining the question more precisely we will only work against our goal of answering the question.

Answer choice (A): The passage does not show that the claim is irrelevant to the issue at hand. It merely shows that the claim is incorrect because it will work against our goal of answering the question with regards to intelligent life elsewhere.

Answer choice (B): The passage does not cite any examples that fail to fit a proposed definition of “intelligent life”.

Answer choice (C): The passage does not claim that “intelligent life” cannot be adequately defined. Rather, it argues that defining it more precisely will work against our goal of answering the question of intelligent life elsewhere. To find and recognize intelligent life, the stimulus argues, we must leave our definitions open to new possibilities.

Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice. The passage argues against the claim that we can answer the question about intelligent life by defining the question more precisely, because the claim will actually work against our goal. If we want to answer the question about intelligent life, the passage argues, we must leave our definitions open to new possibilities. Thus it will be counterproductive for us to define the question of intelligent life more precisely, as the claim suggests that we do, since it will in fact prevent us from finding and recognizing intelligent life elsewhere in the universe.

Answer choice (E): The passage does not argue that the claim is unsupported by evidence, but rather that it will not aid us in our goal. In fact, the passage suggests that the claim will work against our goal of finding intelligent life elsewhere in the universe.

Thanks a tonne mikemcgarry sir for the response. Its pretty much clear now

Thanks mikemcgarry!
It is much clear now

Saying that, on exam, in 9 cases out of 10 I would guess on this question right after skimming the answer choices is overgiving credits to myself. It's 10 out of 10

The question whether intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is certainly imprecise, because we are not sure how different from use something might be and still count as "intelligent life" Yet we cannot just decide to define "intelligent life" in some more precise way since it is likely that we will find and recognize intelligent life elsewhere in the universe only if we leave our definitions open to new, unimagined possibilities.

The passage, if seen as an objection to an antecedent claim, challenges that claim by:

Must be D. The key words are: "open to new, unimagined possibilities". It's not that an adequate definition cannot be conjured, but that coming up with one limits the scope of what can potentially count as an intelligent life form, an idea supported by the fact that there are uncertainties regarding the divergence between technical definitions and actual life forms.

C is a trap.

This is the perfect epitome for " read the argument carefully and go back to the paragraph and recheck once you have chosen your answer " questions. If you had done so after picking C, you would have realised that the author doesn't specify that x cannot be precisely defined. He just says that it shouldn't be, irrespective of whether or not it can be, since doing so would effect the possibility of obtaining favourable results and in short "counter-productive". Extremely useful question!

Hi Mike,

Thank you for the explanation.

It is very hard to determine that "act on that claim" means "give a more precise definition". I believe this already steps out of the boundaries of CR. This is basically how good a cryptographist you are, and how well you can decode a bar code language.

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.