- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8950
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Fri May 06, 2016 8:56 am
#24015
Complete Question Explanation
Strengthen—PR.The correct answer choice is (E)
Again, Lola concludes that we should not allow our eagerness for a specific medical breakthrough to lead to a course of action which might have potentially negative and far-reaching consequences for an entire ecosystem.
Answer Choice (A): In fact, this principle contradicts Lola’s position, as it indicates that endangered plant and animal populations are never a higher priority then people’s well-being.
Answer Choice (B): Lola’s position does not depend upon a consensus between medical researchers and environmentalists and this answer is discredited as a result.
Answer Choice (C): This principle embodies the opposite of Lola’s position. She holds that environmental concerns should play a role in decisions concerning medical research even if human lives are at stake, as they presumably are with regards to anticancer drugs.
Answer Choice (D): As with Answer Choice (C), were Lola’s position to conform to this principle, she would likely agree with Derek, as the anticancer chemical in the Pacific yew could potentially save human lives, which would in turn justify threatening the environment. As we know, however, Lola believes that threatening the environment, even when it might save human lives, may not be justifiable.
Answer Choice (E):This is the correct answer choice. Lola holds that avoiding actions that threaten an entire ecosystem (harvesting the Pacific yew) takes precedence over immediately providing advantage to a restricted group of people (those whose specific cancers might potentially be medically treated by the chemical in the Pacific yew).
Strengthen—PR.The correct answer choice is (E)
Again, Lola concludes that we should not allow our eagerness for a specific medical breakthrough to lead to a course of action which might have potentially negative and far-reaching consequences for an entire ecosystem.
Answer Choice (A): In fact, this principle contradicts Lola’s position, as it indicates that endangered plant and animal populations are never a higher priority then people’s well-being.
Answer Choice (B): Lola’s position does not depend upon a consensus between medical researchers and environmentalists and this answer is discredited as a result.
Answer Choice (C): This principle embodies the opposite of Lola’s position. She holds that environmental concerns should play a role in decisions concerning medical research even if human lives are at stake, as they presumably are with regards to anticancer drugs.
Answer Choice (D): As with Answer Choice (C), were Lola’s position to conform to this principle, she would likely agree with Derek, as the anticancer chemical in the Pacific yew could potentially save human lives, which would in turn justify threatening the environment. As we know, however, Lola believes that threatening the environment, even when it might save human lives, may not be justifiable.
Answer Choice (E):This is the correct answer choice. Lola holds that avoiding actions that threaten an entire ecosystem (harvesting the Pacific yew) takes precedence over immediately providing advantage to a restricted group of people (those whose specific cancers might potentially be medically treated by the chemical in the Pacific yew).