Conclusion? P31-s3-Q16 Forum

Prepare for the LSAT or discuss it with others in this forum.
Post Reply
wanderlust

New
Posts: 66
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 12:02 pm

Conclusion? P31-s3-Q16

Post by wanderlust » Sat Apr 23, 2011 3:21 am

Could anyone please help me with the conclusion of this argument?
At first, I thought the ethicist's conclusion is the second sentence. But the correct answer choice seems to imply that the ethicist' point is "it's not enough to ban cloning on the ground of vanity" - which is not explicitly stated in the ethicist's argument?
does this mean sometime the argument's conclusion can be implicit?
Thanks!!

wanderlust

New
Posts: 66
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 12:02 pm

Re: Conclusion? P31-s3-Q16

Post by wanderlust » Tue Apr 26, 2011 4:20 am

up

User avatar
suspicious android

Silver
Posts: 919
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 4:54 pm

Re: Conclusion? P31-s3-Q16

Post by suspicious android » Thu Apr 28, 2011 12:06 am

Yeah, the conclusion here is implicit, I'd basically phrase it as "the people who want to ban cloning are wrong."

Post Reply

Return to “LSAT Prep and Discussion Forum”