15. Susan: Those who oppose experimentation on animals do not properly value the preservation of human life. Although animal suffering is unfortunate, it is justifiable if it can lead to cures for human ailments.
Melvin: But much animal experimentation involves testing of ordinary consumer products such as soaps, dyes, and cosmetics.
Susan: These experiments are justifiable on the same grounds, since cleanliness, convenience, and beauty are worthwhile human values deserving of support.
Which of the following is the best statement of the logical flaw in Susan’s argument?
(A) Her claim that animal experimentation is justifiable if it supports human values contradicts her claim that such experimentation is justifiable only if it leads to cures for human ailments.
(B) She places a higher value on human cleanliness, convenience, and beauty than she does on the preservation of animal life.
(C) She uses the word “value” in two different senses.
(D) She assumes that all ordinary consumer products aid in the preservation of human life.（E）
(E) She fails to show how mere support for human values actually preserves human lives.
[求教]我实在想不透要如何推得答案E??
架桥 阿
第一句她说preservation of human life
随后worthwhile human values 。
so connect the two avove
What about option A?
It is wrong because :
Susan's second claim does not controdicts her first claim
or
Susan's first claim is not that experiment is justifialbe only if it leads to cures for human ailments?
Susan made her second argument based upon the same ground as the her first argument, so E is directed from this kind of inference.
恩。~原来是这样，我在C上纠结很久！
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |