Speaker: A certain ethical theory holds that everyone has six fundamen

Question

Speaker: A certain ethical theory holds that everyone has six fundamental duties: to avoid causing harm to others, to promote the common good, to act honorably, to be fair, to obey authority, and to be loyal. According to the theory, when these duties conflict, avoiding causing harm to others is more important than being fair or acting honorably, and being fair is more important than obeying authority. Promoting the common good is more important than being loyal but is less important than acting honorably or obeying authority.

Statement: The speaker's statements do NOT indicate that the duty to ______1______ is ever less important than any of other duties, and the statements do NOT indicate that the duty to ______2______ is ever more important than any of the other duties.

Select for  1  and  2  the options that complete the statement so that it is most accurate based on the information provided. Make only two selections, one in each column.

Bunuel · Accepted Answer

Speaker: A certain ethical theory holds that everyone has six fundamental duties: to avoid causing harm to others, to promote the common good, to act honorably, to be fair, to obey authority, and to be loyal. According to the theory, when these duties conflict, avoiding causing harm to others is more important than being fair or acting honorably, and being fair is more important than obeying authority. Promoting the common good is more important than being loyal but is less important than acting honorably or obeying authority.

Statement: The speaker's statements do NOT indicate that the duty to ______1______ is ever less important than any of other duties, and the statements do NOT indicate that the duty to ______2______ is ever more important than any of the other duties.

Select for 1 and 2 the options that complete the statement so that it is most accurate based on the information provided. Make only two selections, one in each column.

Blank 1 must be a duty that is never shown as less important than anything else. The speaker only says “avoid causing harm” is more important than other duties (more important than being fair or acting honorably). It is never placed below any duty.

So, 1 = avoid causing harm to others

Blank 2 must be a duty that is never shown as more important than anything else. “Be loyal” is only mentioned as less important than promoting the common good. It is never placed above any duty.

So, 2 = be loyal

Complete ranking implied by the statements:

avoid causing harm to others > act honorably
avoid causing harm to others > be fair
be fair > obey authority
act honorably > promote the common good
obey authority > promote the common good
promote the common good > be loyal

So the chain that is fully supported is:

Avoid causing harm to others > act honorably > promote the common good > be loyal
Avoid causing harm to others > be fair > obey authority > promote the common good > be loyal

Show Spoiler

Attachment:

GMAT-Club-Forum-kau2eb6d.png [ 19.03 KiB | Viewed 1515 times ]

Parthkulkarni · Answer

It becomes simpler to interpret question if you do opposing logic on the statement. Negate the statement, rather than do Not, use Do and change the ever less important to ever more important.. that way it becomes very easy to understand and not get puzzled. Hope it helps

Posted from my mobile device

Posted from my mobile device

varad98 · Answer

Writing down points in heirarchy will help in this question
Avoid Harm
Being Fair & Acting Honourably
Obey Authority & or below Promoting Good
Being Loyal

carbonex8010 · Answer

1. avoid causing harm to others> be fair/ act honorably
2. be fair > obey authority
3. act honorably / obey authority > promote the common good > be loyal

This equation will help you out.

Bismuth83 · Answer

1. The question asks us to find a fundamental duty X and Y such that: X is not indicated to be less important than any other (it should be the most important now) and Y is not more important than any other (it should be the least important now).

2. Let all the fundamental duties be given a letter that represents its value: to avoid causing harm to others - A, to promote the common good - B, to act honorably - C, to be fair - D, to obey authority - E, and to be loyal - F.

3. From the problem, we can write down the following inequalities: A > D, A > C, D > E, B > F, C > B, E > B.

4. It's easier to draw this out. Let each value be a dot and each inequality is an arrow (the arrow heads to the larger value).

5. The graph can be changed to look better.

6. X is the value that all the arrows eventually lead to - which is A. Y is the value that has no arrows going to it - which is F.

7. Our answer will be that X is A and Y is F.

Show Spoiler

Attachment:

Image_Poset6Ordered.jpg [ 19.94 KiB | Viewed 9604 times ]

Attachment:

Image_Poset6Unordered.jpg [ 22.46 KiB | Viewed 9645 times ]

AditiDeokar · Answer

Experts will this be the right way to solve the above Question

Bunuel · Answer

What the stem actually asks you to check

Blank 1 : “do NOT indicate that duty X is ever less important than any other duty”
This means: nowhere in the speaker’s comparisons do we ever see X below something else. So the test is: is there any sentence of the form X < another duty
 If yes, X cannot go in blank 1
If no, X can go in blank 1

Blank 2:  “do NOT indicate that duty Y is ever more important than any other duty”
This means: nowhere in the speaker’s comparisons do we ever see Y above something else. So the test is: is there any sentence of the form Y > another duty
 If yes, Y cannot go in blank 2
If no, Y can go in blank 2

That solution's “negate it” method is not logically precise.

It is treating:
 “do NOT indicate X is ever less important than any other duty” 
as if it becomes:
 “do indicate X is ever more important than any other duty.”

Those are not opposites, so the rewrite can change the meaning and push you to the wrong pick.

For example, if the prompt gives no comparisons at all about duty X, then it is still true that the statements do NOT indicate X is ever less important than any other duty (nothing puts X below anything). But it is not true that the statements indicate X is ever more important than any other duty (nothing puts X above anything either). So his “negation” fails.

So that solution is unreliable: it can look simpler, but it is not a valid logical transformation of the stem.

Speaker: A certain ethical theory holds that everyone has six fundamen

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

1	2
		avoid causing harm to others
		promote the common good
		act honorably
		be fair
		obey authority
		be loyal

GMAT Two-part Analysis (TPA) Questions

Speaker: A certain ethical theory holds that everyone has six fundamen

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