BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Must be true

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 185
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 3:06 am
Thanked: 6 times

Must be true

by gmatnmein2010 » Tue Feb 09, 2010 3:03 am
Mary, a veterinary student, has been assigned an experiment in mammalian physiology that would require her to take a healthy, anesthetized dog and subject it to a drastic blood loss in order to observe the physiological consequences of shock. The dog would neither regain consciousness nor survive the experiment. Mary decides not to do this assignment.

Mary's decision most closely accords with which one of the following principles?

(A) All other things being equal, gratuitously causing any animal to suffer pain is unjustified.
(B) Taking the life of an animal is not justifiable unless doing so would immediately assist in saving several animal lives or in protecting the health of a person.
(C) The only sufficient justification for experimenting on animals is that future animal suffering is thereby prevented.
(D) Practicing veterinarians have a professional obligation to strive to prevent the unnecessary death of an animal except in cases of severely ill or injured animals whose prospects for recovery are dim.
(E) No one is ever justified in acting with the sole intention of causing the death of a living thing, be it animal or human.
Top
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1560
Joined: Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:38 am
Thanked: 137 times
Followed by:5 members

by thephoenix » Tue Feb 09, 2010 3:39 am
A)This talks about issuing pain on an animal, but the passage talks specifically about an anesthetized animal, so it can't be correct

B)This indicates that killing an animal would be OK if it helps several animals or a person. However, Mary doesn't go through with it, so this is the opposite of what the conclusion states.

C) The argument doesn't talk about any other animals. this is out of scope.

d)The statement coincides with the conclusion (not killing an animal unnecessarily) unless it is medically necessary (i.e. a terminally ill animal)

e)This one talks about humans, which the passage does not mention at all
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 941
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2009 12:28 am
Thanked: 20 times
Followed by:1 members

by bhumika.k.shah » Tue Feb 09, 2010 7:10 am
Hi,
Ive just started going through the CR bible ..and hope its started doing its wonders to me :)

Well i think the Question type is must be true type.

IMO the answer is D.

in these question types , we are to assume whatever is given in the stimulus as true. And suspect the answer choices.Eliminate answer options that go beyond the scope of the stimulus.

Following this principle , i chose D.

A. As gratuitously causing pain and its justification is out of the stimulus's scope. ELIMINATE

B. protecting the health of a person or saving other animal's lives is nowhere mentioned in the text. ELIMINATE

C. The only - tooo extreme + future animal suffering - its not mentioned in the text. ELIMINATE

E. NO one - extreme + sole intention of causing death - i cant find anything as such in the text. ELIMINATE


D is the only one which can be concluded from the stimulus.Since she was a veterinary student and also that unless really needed to do so.

Please correct me if i am wrong :)
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 777
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:02 am
Location: Mumbai, India
Thanked: 117 times
Followed by:47 members

by komal » Tue Feb 09, 2010 7:10 am
gmatnmein2010 wrote:Mary, a veterinary student, has been assigned an experiment in mammalian physiology that would require her to take a healthy, anesthetized dog and subject it to a drastic blood loss in order to observe the physiological consequences of shock. The dog would neither regain consciousness nor survive the experiment. Mary decides not to do this assignment.

Mary's decision most closely accords with which one of the following principles?

(A) All other things being equal, gratuitously causing any animal to suffer pain is unjustified.
Incorrect : It is mentioned in the stimulus that the dog is to be anesthesized so there is no pain. And since it is an experiment in mammalian physiology there is a purpose (it is not gratuitous). Ruled Out.

(B) Taking the life of an animal is not justifiable unless doing so would immediately assist in saving several animal lives or in protecting the health of a person.
Correct : This principle looks ok as far as mary's decision is concerned. A very strong contender indeed.

(C) The only sufficient justification for experimenting on animals is that future animal suffering is thereby prevented.
Incorrect : Experimenting does not mean causing death. Eliminated.

(D) Practicing veterinarians have a professional obligation to strive to prevent the unnecessary death of an animal except in cases of severely ill or injured animals whose prospects for recovery are dim.
Incorrect : Mary is a veterinary STUDENT, not a PRACTICING veterinarian. Eliminated !!

(E) No one is ever justified in acting with the sole intention of causing the death of a living thing, be it animal or human.
Incorrect : In the case cited above, causing death of the dog is certainly NOT the sole intention. Eliminated.
Hope this helps : )
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 941
Joined: Sun Dec 27, 2009 12:28 am
Thanked: 20 times
Followed by:1 members

by bhumika.k.shah » Tue Feb 09, 2010 7:14 am
But komal,

just for one word ( practicing ) one can eliminate D ?

From the stimulus , where can we find that its talking about saving lives of several other animals or health of people?

komal wrote:
gmatnmein2010 wrote:Mary, a veterinary student, has been assigned an experiment in mammalian physiology that would require her to take a healthy, anesthetized dog and subject it to a drastic blood loss in order to observe the physiological consequences of shock. The dog would neither regain consciousness nor survive the experiment. Mary decides not to do this assignment.

Mary's decision most closely accords with which one of the following principles?

(A) All other things being equal, gratuitously causing any animal to suffer pain is unjustified.
Incorrect : It is mentioned in the stimulus that the dog is to be anesthesized so there is no pain. And since it is an experiment in mammalian physiology there is a purpose (it is not gratuitous). Ruled Out.

(B) Taking the life of an animal is not justifiable unless doing so would immediately assist in saving several animal lives or in protecting the health of a person.
Correct : This principle looks ok as far as mary's decision is concerned. A very strong contender indeed.

(C) The only sufficient justification for experimenting on animals is that future animal suffering is thereby prevented.
Incorrect : Experimenting does not mean causing death. Eliminated.

(D) Practicing veterinarians have a professional obligation to strive to prevent the unnecessary death of an animal except in cases of severely ill or injured animals whose prospects for recovery are dim.
Incorrect : Mary is a veterinary STUDENT, not a PRACTICING veterinarian. Eliminated !!

(E) No one is ever justified in acting with the sole intention of causing the death of a living thing, be it animal or human.
Incorrect : In the case cited above, causing death of the dog is certainly NOT the sole intention. Eliminated.
Hope this helps : )
Top
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 777
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:02 am
Location: Mumbai, India
Thanked: 117 times
Followed by:47 members

by komal » Tue Feb 09, 2010 8:07 am
bhumika.k.shah wrote:But komal,

just for one word ( practicing ) one can eliminate D ?

From the stimulus , where can we find that its talking about saving lives of several other animals or health of people?

The word 'practicing' is very specific when it comes to describing professionals :

'Practicing doctor' means a doctor who has already completed his/her studies and has started practicing medicine.
'Practicing lawyer' means a lawyer who has already completed his/her studies and has started practicing law.

So basically in the argument above, Mary is a student, not yet a doctor & hence not a Medical Practitioner.

Hope this helps : )
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 59
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 10:11 pm
Location: United States
Thanked: 4 times

by chaya009 » Tue Feb 09, 2010 11:50 am
I think D is eliminated because it says Veterinarians strive to prevent the unnecessary death of an animal except in cases of severely ill or injured animals whose prospects for recovery are dim.

But here the dog is perfectly healthy.

Correct me if i am wrong.

I find these CR questions a bit difficult.
Top
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1