Critical Reasoning

The question whether intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is certainly imprecise, because we are not sure how different from us 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:
(A) showing the claim to be irrelevant to the issue at hand
(B) citing examples that fail to fit proposed definition of “intelligent life”
(C) claiming that “intelligent life” cannot be adequately defined
(D) arguing that the claim, if acted on, would be counterproductive
(E) maintaining that the claim is not supported by the available evidence
OA D

Wow this one's a shocker. I selected C. Does anyone if we have these type of questions on the actual test. I mean one that asks:

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

I don't understand why D is the correct answer. Is there a method to attack this kind of question?

Damn.. I also picked C.

I guess the argument says that if we make a definition to intelligent life we won't be able to find them else where in the universe, that is why it would be counterproductive.

But still

Very tricky and deceptive question ...
Let me try to explain it ...

The question whether intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is certainly imprecise, because we are not sure how different from us 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

Notice the Bold part . It is saying a new and unimagined possibility is there only when we are not defining "Intelligent Life" .. Once we have defined it is fixed snd all doors will be closed ... So it can act as counter productive what option [D] says ..

Experts please suggest ...

The passage, if seen as an objection to an antecedent claim, challenges that claim by:
We start of by looking for the claim in the argument.

The argument claims, that the question whether artificial intelligence exists is imprecise and the reason is we cannot be 'sure how different from us something might be and still count as “intelligent life.'

So the claim implies that if we have a precise definition for 'intelligent life' the question 'whether intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe' becomes precise.

The argument then goes and shows that if we act on this claim it would be counterproductive - 'we will find and recognize intelligent life elsewhere in the universe only if we leave our definitions open to new'

Hence, D

Thank you for the explanations. Anyway I hope not to come across a question like this in the exam because I'm sure I'll get it wrong.

Well the word that raised a red flag when i read the stimulus was YET. so something is being discussed first and then comes the counter premise word. so the first sentence is being objected in the second one.
So where should we concentrate? simple maths tells us that our answer should be the first statement.
first statement has a conclusion and a premise. So our answer will obviously be the conclusion.

so we need to look for an answer choice that says "The question whether intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is certainly imprecise"

(A) The question whether intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is one that will never be correctly answered. [the statement just tells the question is imprecise. it does not state that the question will never be answered at all. Eliminated!]

(B) Whether or not there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, our understanding of intelligent life is limited.[the first statement does not talk about our understanding at all. Eliminated!]

(C) The question about the existence of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe must be made more precise if we hope to answer it correctly. [ Correctly articulates the statement. My answer]

(D) The question whether there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe is so imprecise as to be meaningless.[This is not stated in the first statement at all. Eliminated!]

(E) The question whether there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe is one we should not spend our time trying to answer. [Whoa where is this mentioned in the first statement. NASA are u listening about this choice?? ]

Hope this helps!

fibbonnaci wrote:Well the word that raised a red flag when i read the stimulus was YET. so something is being discussed first and then comes the counter premise word. so the first sentence is being objected in the second one.
So where should we concentrate? simple maths tells us that our answer should be the first statement.
first statement has a conclusion and a premise. So our answer will obviously be the conclusion.

so we need to look for an answer choice that says "The question whether intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is certainly imprecise"

(A) The question whether intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is one that will never be correctly answered. [the statement just tells the question is imprecise. it does not state that the question will never be answered at all. Eliminated!]

(B) Whether or not there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, our understanding of intelligent life is limited.[the first statement does not talk about our understanding at all. Eliminated!]

(C) The question about the existence of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe must be made more precise if we hope to answer it correctly. [ Correctly articulates the statement. My answer]

(D) The question whether there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe is so imprecise as to be meaningless.[This is not stated in the first statement at all. Eliminated!]

(E) The question whether there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe is one we should not spend our time trying to answer. [Whoa where is this mentioned in the first statement. NASA are u listening about this choice?? ]

Hope this helps!

Exactly, that is why I picked C. I would have picked D, had the question stem said The conclusion, if seen as an objection to an antecedent claim, challenges that claim by:

I also chose [spoiler]'C'[/spoiler].

Is the official answer [spoiler]'C' or 'D'?[/spoiler]

hi,

please provide some more explanation...

regards,

Ansumania

sogmat wrote:The question whether intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is certainly imprecise, because we are not sure how different from us 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:
(A) showing the claim to be irrelevant to the issue at hand
(B) citing examples that fail to fit proposed definition of �intelligent life�
(C) claiming that �intelligent life� cannot be adequately defined
(D) arguing that the claim, if acted on, would be counterproductive
(E) maintaining that the claim is not supported by the available evidence
OA D

Is this an LSAT CR question? I have not seen this stem before.

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

Hope its not an official GMAT question.

sogmat wrote:The question whether intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is certainly imprecise, because we are not sure how different from us 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:
(A) showing the claim to be irrelevant to the issue at hand
(B) citing examples that fail to fit proposed definition of �intelligent life�
(C) claiming that �intelligent life� cannot be adequately defined
(D) arguing that the claim, if acted on, would be counterproductive
(E) maintaining that the claim is not supported by the available evidence
OA D

We have to read the whole passage as an objection to a previously made claim. The author seems to agree that the question is imprecise, but takes issue with the claim (recommendation, assertion) that 'intelligent life' should be precisely defined: the author asserts that such a definition would likely cause us to fail to recognize 'intelligent life' that presented itself in the future. In other words, defining 'intelligent life' might prevent us from correctly answering the question at hand. Thus, acting on the claim would be counterproductive. Answer: D

This smells like an LSAT question

Guys can anyone give a decent reason why C is not right.