Paula: In recent years, DNA evidence has cleared many people

Question

Paula: In recent years, DNA evidence has cleared many people who had been wrongfully executed by the state. Capital punishment is therefore morally wrong and ought to be abolished.

Phil: It is certainly tragic that innocent people have been put to death. But this is a problem with the application of the death penalty, and as such does not invalidate the death penalty itself. Many innocent people are wrongfully imprisoned, but I doubt you would argue that imprisonment is wrong.

Phil does which of the following in response to Paula’s argument?

He introduces new evidence that undermines Paula’s claim.

He points out that Paula’s argument is selfcontradictory.

He uses the same evidence to draw the opposite conclusion.

He rejects the source of Paula’s evidence

He dismisses Paula’s evidence as support for her conclusion.

anshumishra · Answer

Phil is stating that Paula's evidence is not convincing. The conclusion should be that the application is wrong, not the penalty itself (similar to as (Innocent people are jailed doesn't mean imprisonment is wrong ).

E.

E.

StrangeWind · Answer

E

144144 · Answer

I think its C not E... anyone agree?

goalgmatnew · Answer

IMO E

144144 · Answer

YE, agreed now... blah.

gmat1220 · Answer

if it not C then E.

He uses the same evidence to draw "HALF" opposite conclusion - Phil never supported that death penalty is morally wrong. But he said he is against abolition. Half opposite. Hence C gone.

E - It has to be the answer.

miguelmick · Answer

Seems easy. I chose E.

IndigoIntentions · Answer

Paula:

i) DNA evidence clears people who were executed.
ii) Therefore, the death penalty is wrong morally.

Phil uses this logic for imprisonment and states that it is faulty.
i) Many people are wrongfully imprisoned
ii) Therefore, imprisonment is morally wrong

E) is the correct answer since Phil is undermining the SUPPORT that the evidence is providing to Paula's claim. He is not undermining the evidence itself , since he accepts it in very first line. 
It is clear that he is not accepting the way Paula uses her evidence to give a claim.

metallicafan · Answer

IMO, it is A.

Phil doesn't dismiss Paula's evidence. He agrees with that information, even he says: "It is certainly tragic that innocent people have been put to death"
E is incorrect.

Also, he introduces new information when he says: "Many innocent people are wrongfully imprisoned".

Hence, A is correct.

gmat1220 · Answer

He agrees with the premise given by Paula. Not the conclusion. The conclusion drawn by both is different.

In recent years, DNA evidence has cleared many people who had been wrongfully executed by the state. 
Paula agree. Phil agree

Capital punishment is therefore morally wrong and ought to be abolished.
Paula agree, Phil disagree

Paula: In recent years, DNA evidence has cleared many people

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