Logical reasoning PrepTest 111 · Section 4 · Question 15

Incorrect. While the Geneticist argues that there will never be clones that are exact duplicates of the original as far as personality/goals are concerned, there's no indication that making a genetic clone is impossible. In fact, in stating that a more realistic possibility is creating living organ banks, the Geneticist suggests that it is at least possible that such a clone could be created.

Incorrect. There's no claim that only wealthy people will be able to have these clones made, so this answer is out of scope.

Incorrect. There's no evidence provided that wealthy people would use clones as living organ banks—that's presented without support as a more realistic possibility to argue against the realisticness of creating an army of exact clones.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Valid

Question Type:
Argument Structure

Stimulus Summary:
Ethicists: Cloning humans could lead to bad things
Geneticist: Many of the Ethicists' fears are reasonable

Common image: Cloning will result in an army of exact duplicates
Geneticist: This is unrealistic
Geneticist's support: Clones have to be raised, and so they can't end up the exact same. It's more likely they'd be used as organ banks.

Answer Anticipation:
This argument has several viewpoints, and the Geneticist weighs in on essentially everything, so we need to keep it all straight!

First, we get the view of Ethicists. The Geneticist says that they have some reasonable fears!

However, the argument then pivots away from this to another view—a horror-movie image of a wealthy person creating an army of clones, and this viewpoint the Geneticist disagrees with. Specifically, she believes that it's unrealistic. Since the Geneticist believes that the Ethicists have reasonable fears, but this one is unreasonable, we have a separate viewpoint, not a continuation of the Ethicists' view. This view might be one of the Ethicists' fears, but it isn't necessarily one of them, so we should view them as separate.

When the author of an argument draws a conclusion about an opposing view, it's almost always the main point of the argument. That determination is backed up here because she then goes on to highlight why she believes it's unrealistic, which supports that conclusion, and what's a more realistic outcome, which also supports that view by contrasting it against the common view.

The statement in question is the reason why the Geneticist believes that the horror-movie image is unrealistic, and so it's a premise supporting the main point of the argument.

Answer Explanation:
The Geneticist brings up reasonable fears of cloning, and an unrealistic one. The statement in question supports the conclusion that the given fear is unrealistic, and so this answer is correct.

Key Takeaway:
Always be sure to track viewpoints through arguments, especially when there are more than two!