Last visit was: 24 Apr 2026, 17:45 It is currently 24 Apr 2026, 17:45
Home
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
655-705 (Hard)|   Conclusion|      
User avatar
akela
User avatar
Joined: 30 Jan 2016
Last visit: 23 May 2023
Posts: 1,227
Own Kudos:
6,349
 [18]
Given Kudos: 128
Products:
My Reviews
Posts: 1,227
Kudos: 6,349
 [18]
Ethicist: Robert Gillette has argued that because a thorough knowledge 14 Jun 2018, 09:05
4
Kudos
Add Kudos
14
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
00:00
Start Timer
Pause Timer
Resume Timer
Show Answer
Hide
Show
History
E
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

61% (01:46) correct 39% (01:53) wrong based on 661 sessions

History

Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Ethicist: Robert Gillette has argued that because a thorough knowledge of genetics would enable us to cure the over 3,000 inherited disorders that affect humanity, deciphering the human genetic code will certainly benefit humanity despite its enormous cost. Gillette's argument is not persuasive, however, because he fails to consider that such knowledge might ultimately harm human beings more than it would benefit them.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the conclusion of the ethicist's argument?

(A) Gillette's argument wrongly assumes that deciphering the genetic code will lead to cures for genetic disorders.
(B) Deciphering the genetic code might ultimately harm human beings more than benefit them.
(C) Because of its possible negative consequences, genetic research should not be conducted.
(D) Gillette's claim that a thorough knowledge of genetics would enable us to cure over 3,000 disorders is overstated.
(E) Gillette's argument is unconvincing because it ignores certain possible consequences of genetic research.

Source: LSAT
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
E
User avatar
jayarora
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 24 Oct 2016
Last visit: 26 Apr 2025
Posts: 159
Own Kudos:
238
Given Kudos: 116
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, Strategy
Schools: Harvard '24 (A)
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
GMAT 2: 760 Q50 V44 (Online)
GPA: 3.61
Products:
My Reviews
Schools: Harvard '24 (A)
GMAT 2: 760 Q50 V44 (Online)
Posts: 159
Kudos: 238
Ethicist: Robert Gillette has argued that because a thorough knowledge 14 Jun 2018, 09:11
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
E states the conclusion. “Gillette’s argument is not persuasive because ..”


Sent from my iPhone using GMAT Club Forum
User avatar
alldaytestprep
User avatar
Joined: 08 May 2018
Last visit: 24 Apr 2023
Posts: 98
Own Kudos:
108
 [3]
Given Kudos: 1
Affiliations: All Day Test Prep
Location: United States (IL)
Schools: Booth '20 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V49
GRE 1: Q167 V167
GPA: 3.58
Expert
Expert reply
Schools: Booth '20 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V49
GRE 1: Q167 V167
Posts: 98
Kudos: 108
 [3]
Ethicist: Robert Gillette has argued that because a thorough knowledge 15 Jun 2018, 15:49
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Akela
Ethicist: Robert Gillette has argued that because a thorough knowledge of genetics would enable us to cure the over 3,000 inherited disorders that affect humanity, deciphering the human genetic code will certainly benefit humanity despite its enormous cost. Gillette's argument is not persuasive, however, because he fails to consider that such knowledge might ultimately harm human beings more than it would benefit them.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the conclusion of the ethicist's argument?

(A) Gillette's argument wrongly assumes that deciphering the genetic code will lead to cures for genetic disorders.
(B) Deciphering the genetic code might ultimately harm human beings more than benefit them.
(C) Because of its possible negative consequences, genetic research should not be conducted.
(D) Gillette's claim that a thorough knowledge of genetics would enable us to cure over 3,000 disorders is overstated.
(E) Gillette's argument is unconvincing because it ignores certain possible consequences of genetic research.

Source: LSAT
Show more

I say E. This is pretty explicitly the main point being argued by the ethicist.

A) The ethicist isn't saying this. He's merely saying the bad will outweigh the good.
B) This is the reason for the ethicists conclusion not the conclusion itself
C) The ethicists conclusion is an objection to the persuasiveness of Gilette's argument not genetic research itself
D) Out of scope. The ethicist's argument is that Gilette's argument omits key information not overstates it.

Answer: E
User avatar
unraveled
User avatar
Joined: 07 Mar 2019
Last visit: 10 Apr 2025
Posts: 2,706
Own Kudos:
2,329
Given Kudos: 763
Location: India
WE:Sales (Energy)
Posts: 2,706
Kudos: 2,329
Ethicist: Robert Gillette has argued that because a thorough knowledge 29 May 2024, 08:41
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Ethicist: Robert Gillette has argued that because a thorough knowledge of genetics would enable us to cure the over 3,000 inherited disorders that affect humanity, deciphering the human genetic code will certainly benefit humanity despite its enormous cost. Gillette's argument is not persuasive, however, because he fails to consider that such knowledge might ultimately harm human beings more than it would benefit them.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the conclusion of the ethicist's argument?

(A) Gillette's argument wrongly assumes that deciphering the genetic code will lead to cures for genetic disorders. - WRONG. He might be right about deciphering the genetic code and cures but not about the other aspects.
(B) Deciphering the genetic code might ultimately harm human beings more than benefit them. - WRONG. Already said and its just half conclusion. 
(C) Because of its possible negative consequences, genetic research should not be conducted. - WRONG. Conduction of research is bit an extreme claim as nowhere it is suggested that Ethicist may say that. 
(D) Gillette's claim that a thorough knowledge of genetics would enable us to cure over 3,000 disorders is overstated. - WRONG. Subtle. It seems to suggest that Ethicist agrees withe claim but 3000 figure is overstated, which is not the case actually.
(E) Gillette's argument is unconvincing because it ignores certain possible consequences of genetic research. - CORRECT. Definitely right. 

Answer E.
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 19,424
Own Kudos:
1,010
Posts: 19,424
Kudos: 1,010
Ethicist: Robert Gillette has argued that because a thorough knowledge 08 Sep 2025, 10:39
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot:

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

This post was generated automatically.
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7391 posts
AbhishekP220108
504 posts
bhanu29
358 posts