Logical reasoning PrepTest 121 · Section 1 · Question 9

Incorrect. First, the scientists developed theories—others turned them into products. Second, there's no indication that these things that are damaging the environment are being "improperly" used.

Incorrect. The stimulus establishes that the research here had consequences that couldn't be foreseen, so this answer doesn't apply.

Incorrect. There's no discussion of whether these scientists should be praised for positive outcomes, just that they shouldn't be blamed for the unforeseeable negative ones.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen (Principle)

Stimulus Summary:
Judgment - Scientists who researched theories that ended up damaging the environment shouldn't be held responsible for that damage
Why? - They couldn't foresee or restrict the products made using their theories

Answer Anticipation:
Strengthen (Principle) questions generally have answers that justify a judgment in the conclusion based on details from the premise(s). It's usually best to start with that conclusion and then identify the premises that do the most to support it (while still falling short—these arguments are flawed, after all!).

Here, the judgment is that scientists who develop certain damaging theories shouldn't be held responsible for that damage. Why not? Because they couldn't have foreseen it—they were just doing science!

The correct answer should connect these ideas, possibly with respect to scientists but also potentially with a broader statement:
If the consequences of an action (research) can't be foreseen, then the person doing that action shouldn't be held responsible for those consequences.

Answer Explanation:
This answer matches the details of the stimulus to reach its conclusion. The activity here is the research, and this answer starts by saying that the scientists engaged in it shouldn't be held responsible for unforeseen undesirable consequences, which the environmental damage is established to be. Additionally, the scientists did the research, but others developed the products using them (they "could [not] restrict the kinds of products" designed with their theories), matching with that portion of the answer. Since the details match and justify the conclusion of the stimulus, this answer is correct.

Key Takeaway:
Strengthen (Principle) questions will generally describe a scenario and then reach a judgment about that scenario. Correct answers connect the details with the judgment.

Incorrect. Two issues here. First, this answer is about foreseeable consequences. Second, this answer is a principle allowing the conclusion to be drawn that someone should be held responsible.