Q7 - Robert Gillette has argued

[smiller]

Question Type:
Identify the Conclusion

Stimulus Breakdown:
The ethicist's argument follows a form commonly found on the LSAT: it starts with an opposing point (Gillette's argument), followed by the ethicist's conclusion (Gillett's argument is not persuasive), followed by support for the ethicist's conclusion.

Answer Anticipation:
We should watch out for incorrect answers that are similar to the ethicist's conclusion, but distort the meaning.

Correct Answer:
(E)

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) This misrepresents the ethicist's conclusion. The ethicist doesn't disagree with Gillette's claim about curing genetic disorders.

(B) This is the ethicist's premise. It provides support for the ethicist's conclusion that Gillette's argument is not persuasive.

(C) This also misrepresents the ethicists conclusion. It's definitely appealing at first glance, but the ethicist's actual conclusion is not that genetic research should not be conducted. The ethicist's conclusion is specifically about Gillette's argument for deciphering the human genome, and specifically that this one argument is not persuasive.

(D) This misrepresents the ethicist's conclusion in a similar way to (A). The ethicist doesn't disagree with Gillette's claim about curing genetic disorders.

(E) This is the correct answer. It properly states the ethicist's precise conclusion, which is that Gillette's argument is unconvincing.

Takeaway/Pattern: Identify the Conclusion questions will often present an appealing incorrect answer that subtly misrepresents the conclusion. Look for the answer choice that matches the actual meaning of the conclusion in the argument.

#officialexplanation

[rsmithpt267]

I quickly eliminated A-C. I was ready to eliminate D and choose E but second guessed myself and picked D for the following reason:

Doesn't E also include supporting evidence. The Conclusion is that "Gillette's argument is not persuasive." Why? Because he fails to consider that the knowledge could harm humans more than help.

When I read E carefully, it is the conclusion and the evidence for that conclusion. Are we to always assume that in the ID the Conclusion question types, the evidence can be included in the answer and still make it "the Conclusion?"

[maryadkins]

Good question and yes. "Because" here alludes to the fact that the following statement can be/is premise/evidence. It's okay for that to be in the answer choice.

(D) is off because he doesn't say it's overstated. As you noted, the importance in ID the Conclusion questions is to choose the answer that articulates the EXPLICITLY STATED CONCLUSION, not a conclusion to which the argument is merely alluding to or implicitly suggesting.

(A)-(C) likewise don't state the conclusion, which is simply that Gillette's argument isn't persuasive.

[wxpttbh]

I chose D too. But I finally understand why D is wrong. When we use "overstate ", it must be the case that "knowledge of genetics would enable us to cure the over 3,000 inherited disorders" is questionable. In this stimulus, the genetics research may be able to cure so many disorders, but genetic research may also bring harm.