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.
Apr 3001:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Apr 2912:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
May 0111:00 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
May 0306:30 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Verbal trouble on GMAT? Fix it NOW! Join Sunita Singhvi for a focused webinar on actionable strategies to boost your Verbal score and take your performance to the next level.
22 Jan 2017, 12:04
Kudos
Bookmarks
D
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
95%
(hard)
Question Stats:
37% (01:48) correct
63%
(01:57)
wrong
based on 500
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Editorialist: Some people argue that we have an obligation not to cut down trees. However, there can be no obligation to an entity unless that entity has a corresponding right. So if we have an obligation toward trees, then trees have rights. But trees are not the sort of things that can have rights. Therefore, we have no obligation not to cut down trees.
The editorialist's argument depends on assuming which one of the following?
(A) If an entity has a right to certain treatment, we have an obligation to treat it that way.
(B) Any entity that has rights also has obligations.
(C) Only conscious entities are the sort of things that can have rights.
(D) Avoiding cutting down trees is not an obligation owed to some entity other than trees.
(E) One does not always have the right to cut down the trees on one's own property.
The editorialist's argument depends on assuming which one of the following?
(A) If an entity has a right to certain treatment, we have an obligation to treat it that way.
(B) Any entity that has rights also has obligations.
(C) Only conscious entities are the sort of things that can have rights.
(D) Avoiding cutting down trees is not an obligation owed to some entity other than trees.
(E) One does not always have the right to cut down the trees on one's own property.
24 Jan 2017, 22:44
Kudos
Bookmarks
Let us simplify the question given -
Some people -
We do have an obligation to not cut down trees.
Editorialist -
Obligation to an entity --> entity has corresponding right. (Note that whatever follows "unless" is the necessary condition)
Therefore,
obligations to trees --> trees have rights.
But,
trees do not have rights --> so, no obligation not to CUT DOWN trees. - this is the conclusion of the editor.
Note, however, that from the reasoning above we can only draw this conclusion -
trees do not have rights --> so, no obligation to trees - Not the same thing.
the assumption should link these -
no obligation to trees ---> no obligation not to CUT DOWN trees.
A - Incorrect.
this says that -
right --> obligation. this reverses the condition that the argument mentions -
Obligation to an entity --> entity has corresponding right.
B - Incorrect.
this says that -
right --> obligation. this reverses the condition that the argument mentions -
Obligation to an entity --> entity has corresponding right.
C - Incorrect.
this has nothing to do with linking the premise to the conclusion. Whether they are "conscious" or not has no bearing on the argument because we already know that trees do not have rights.
D - Correct answer.
Negate this answer option. So, if we did owe an obligation to some other entity to not cut trees, the conclusion that we do not have an obligation to not cut down trees falls apart. (Note that we still don't owe any obligation to trees).
E - Incorrect.
negate this.
"one always has the right to cut down trees on one's property" - does not lead to the opposing argument that we have an "obligation to not cut down trees".
Some people -
We do have an obligation to not cut down trees.
Editorialist -
Obligation to an entity --> entity has corresponding right. (Note that whatever follows "unless" is the necessary condition)
Therefore,
obligations to trees --> trees have rights.
But,
trees do not have rights --> so, no obligation not to CUT DOWN trees. - this is the conclusion of the editor.
Note, however, that from the reasoning above we can only draw this conclusion -
trees do not have rights --> so, no obligation to trees - Not the same thing.
the assumption should link these -
no obligation to trees ---> no obligation not to CUT DOWN trees.
A - Incorrect.
this says that -
right --> obligation. this reverses the condition that the argument mentions -
Obligation to an entity --> entity has corresponding right.
B - Incorrect.
this says that -
right --> obligation. this reverses the condition that the argument mentions -
Obligation to an entity --> entity has corresponding right.
C - Incorrect.
this has nothing to do with linking the premise to the conclusion. Whether they are "conscious" or not has no bearing on the argument because we already know that trees do not have rights.
D - Correct answer.
Negate this answer option. So, if we did owe an obligation to some other entity to not cut trees, the conclusion that we do not have an obligation to not cut down trees falls apart. (Note that we still don't owe any obligation to trees).
E - Incorrect.
negate this.
"one always has the right to cut down trees on one's property" - does not lead to the opposing argument that we have an "obligation to not cut down trees".
26 Jan 2017, 06:05
Kudos
Bookmarks
The explanation given by CrackVerbalGMAT seems sufficient. If you have any specific queries, please click the "request expert reply" button again and post your query - closing this request.
