Challenger App

No.1 PSC Learning App

★
★
★
★
★
1M+ Downloads

Instruction: Identify the assumptions that must hold for the statement to be valid, then choose the correct option. Statement: The rapid advancement in gene editing technologies such as CRISPR offers immense potential for curing genetic disorders, but it also raises concerns about the ethical implications of editing the human genome.

  1. Gene editing technologies can potentially cure genetic disorders.
  2. Ethical concerns are a natural consequence of advancing gene editing technologies.
  3. The potential for gene editing to cure genetic disorders outweighs the ethical concerns.

    AOnly I and II are implicit

    BOnly II and III are implicit

    COnly I is implicit

    DAll I, II and III are implicit

    Answer:

    A. Only I and II are implicit

    Read Explanation:

    Logical Assumption Analysis

    • Assumption 1: This is a core premise. For the statement to assert that gene editing offers potential for cures, it is logically necessary to assume that the technology possesses the inherent capability to achieve such cures. Without the technical feasibility of gene editing, the entire premise of the statement collapses.
    • Assumption 2: This is an implicit premise regarding the nature of scientific progress. The statement treats ethical concerns as an inevitable accompaniment to this specific technological advancement. This assumption identifies that progress in sensitive areas (like the human genome) carries inherent moral weight, validating the connection between the advancement and the arising concerns.
    • Exclusion of Assumption 3: Assumption 3 is a value judgment, not a logical prerequisite. The statement presents a balanced view (potential vs. ethical concerns) without assigning superiority to one over the other. Asserting that one factor outweighs the other introduces a subjective evaluation that is not required for the statement to be factually or logically valid.

    Key Contextual Knowledge

    • CRISPR-Cas9: Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR) acts as a molecular scissor, allowing for precise editing of DNA sequences. Its discovery revolutionized biotechnology, earning Jennifer Doudna and Emmanuelle Charpentier the 2020 Nobel Prize in Chemistry.
    • Ethical Considerations: The primary ethical debate centers on the distinction between somatic cell editing (which affects only the patient) and germline editing (which affects future generations/heritable changes).
    • Logical Deduction in Exams: In competitive exams, an 'assumption' is an unstated premise that is required for the argument to hold true. If an assumption is proven false, the argument fails. Distinguishing between assumptions (necessary logic) and conclusions or opinions (subjective takes) is a critical skill for Syllogism and Critical Reasoning sections.

    Related Questions:

    Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusion(s) logically follow(s) from the statements. Statements: Some phones are tablets. Some tablets are scanners. All scanners are cameras. Conclusions: (I) Some cameras are tablets. (II) All cameras are phones.
    Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements. Statements: All mints are papers. All papers are stones. All stones are cutters. Conclusions: (I) : All mints are cutters. (II) : Some cutters are papers
    GD 34 is related to HE 24 in a certain way. In the same way, CJ 12 is related to DK 2. To which of the given options is XV 56 related, following the same logic?

    Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusion(s) logically follow(s) from the statements).

    Statements:

    All sharks are whales.

    No whale is a dolphin.

    Conclusions:

    (1) No shark is a dolphin.

    (Il) No dolphin is a whale.

    If'+' means 'x', '-' means '÷', 'x' means'+', then 4 - 2 × 3 + 6 = ?