All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
GMAT Exam  >  GMAT Questions  >  Some legislators refuse to commit public fund... Start Learning for Free
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App
Some legislators refuse to commit public funds for new scientific research if they cannot be assured that the research will contribute to the public welfare. Such a position ignores the lessons of experience. Many important contributions to the public welfare that resulted from scientific research were never predicted as potential outcomes of that research. Suppose that a scientist in the early twentieth century had applied for public funds to study molds: who would have predicted that such research would lead to the discovery of antibiotics—one of the greatest contributions ever made to the public welfare?

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the argument?
  • a)
    The committal of public funds for new scientific research will ensure that the public welfare will be enhanced.
  • b)
    If it were possible to predict the general outcome of a new scientific research effort, then legislators would not refuse to commit public funds for that effort.
  • c)
    Scientific discoveries that have contributed to the public welfare would have occurred sooner if public funds had been committed to the research that generated those discoveries.
  • d)
    In order to ensure that scientific research is directed toward contributing to the public welfare, legislators must commit public funds to new scientific research.
  • e)
    Lack of guarantees that new scientific research will contribute to the public welfare is not sufficient reason for legislators to refuse to commit public funds to new scientific research.
Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?
FREE This question is part of
Download PDF Attempt Test
Download PDF Attempt this Test
Verified Answer
Some legislators refuse to commit public funds for new scientific rese...
(A) The committal of public funds for new scientific research will ensure that the public welfare will be enhanced. This option does not accurately express the main point of the argument. The argument does not claim that committing public funds for scientific research will ensure enhancement of the public welfare. Instead, it argues against the refusal to commit funds based on the lack of assurance of specific outcomes.
(B) If it were possible to predict the general outcome of a new scientific research effort, then legislators would not refuse to commit public funds for that effort. This option does not accurately express the main point of the argument. The argument acknowledges that predicting the specific outcomes of scientific research is difficult and argues against refusal to fund research based on this lack of predictability. However, the argument does not directly address the possibility of predicting general outcomes.
(C) Scientific discoveries that have contributed to the public welfare would have occurred sooner if public funds had been committed to the research that generated those discoveries. This option does not accurately express the main point of the argument. The argument does not focus on the timing of scientific discoveries or make a claim about the acceleration of these discoveries with public funding. Instead, it emphasizes the unpredictability of specific outcomes and argues against the refusal to fund research based on this unpredictability.
(D) In order to ensure that scientific research is directed toward contributing to the public welfare, legislators must commit public funds to new scientific research. This option does not accurately express the main point of the argument. While the argument advocates for the commitment of public funds to scientific research despite the lack of guarantees, it does not claim that this commitment is necessary to ensure that research is directed towards the public welfare. The argument emphasizes the serendipitous nature of scientific discoveries.
(E) Lack of guarantees that new scientific research will contribute to the public welfare is not sufficient reason for legislators to refuse to commit public funds to new scientific research. This option accurately expresses the main point of the argument. The argument challenges the position of legislators who refuse to allocate public funds for scientific research due to the lack of assurance of specific outcomes. It argues that this lack of guarantees should not be a sufficient reason to deny funding, as unexpected and significant contributions to the public welfare can emerge from scientific research.
Therefore, option (E) is the most accurate expression of the main point of the argument.
View all questions of this test
Most Upvoted Answer
Some legislators refuse to commit public funds for new scientific rese...
(A) The committal of public funds for new scientific research will ensure that the public welfare will be enhanced. This option does not accurately express the main point of the argument. The argument does not claim that committing public funds for scientific research will ensure enhancement of the public welfare. Instead, it argues against the refusal to commit funds based on the lack of assurance of specific outcomes.
(B) If it were possible to predict the general outcome of a new scientific research effort, then legislators would not refuse to commit public funds for that effort. This option does not accurately express the main point of the argument. The argument acknowledges that predicting the specific outcomes of scientific research is difficult and argues against refusal to fund research based on this lack of predictability. However, the argument does not directly address the possibility of predicting general outcomes.
(C) Scientific discoveries that have contributed to the public welfare would have occurred sooner if public funds had been committed to the research that generated those discoveries. This option does not accurately express the main point of the argument. The argument does not focus on the timing of scientific discoveries or make a claim about the acceleration of these discoveries with public funding. Instead, it emphasizes the unpredictability of specific outcomes and argues against the refusal to fund research based on this unpredictability.
(D) In order to ensure that scientific research is directed toward contributing to the public welfare, legislators must commit public funds to new scientific research. This option does not accurately express the main point of the argument. While the argument advocates for the commitment of public funds to scientific research despite the lack of guarantees, it does not claim that this commitment is necessary to ensure that research is directed towards the public welfare. The argument emphasizes the serendipitous nature of scientific discoveries.
(E) Lack of guarantees that new scientific research will contribute to the public welfare is not sufficient reason for legislators to refuse to commit public funds to new scientific research. This option accurately expresses the main point of the argument. The argument challenges the position of legislators who refuse to allocate public funds for scientific research due to the lack of assurance of specific outcomes. It argues that this lack of guarantees should not be a sufficient reason to deny funding, as unexpected and significant contributions to the public welfare can emerge from scientific research.
Therefore, option (E) is the most accurate expression of the main point of the argument.
Free Test
FREE
Start Free Test
Start Free Test
Community Answer
Some legislators refuse to commit public funds for new scientific rese...
Main Point of the Argument:

E. Lack of guarantees that new scientific research will contribute to the public welfare is not sufficient reason for legislators to refuse to commit public funds to new scientific research.

Explanation:

Lessons from Experience:
- The argument highlights the importance of not restricting funding for scientific research based on the expectation that it must directly contribute to public welfare.
- It points out that many significant contributions to public welfare have emerged from research that was not initially predicted to lead to such outcomes.

Example of Mold Research:
- The argument uses the example of mold research in the early twentieth century, which eventually led to the discovery of antibiotics.
- This unforeseen breakthrough demonstrates the unpredictable nature of scientific research and its potential to benefit society in unexpected ways.

Legislative Decision-Making:
- Legislators should not withhold public funds for new scientific research solely based on uncertainties about its direct impact on public welfare.
- Embracing the uncertainty and potential for unforeseen discoveries is crucial for fostering innovation and progress.

Conclusion:
- The main point is that legislators should not refuse to commit public funds to new scientific research just because there are no guarantees of immediate, direct contributions to public welfare. The unpredictable nature of scientific discoveries necessitates an open-minded approach to funding research.
Attention GMAT Students!
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed GMAT study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in GMAT.
< Previous Question Next Question >
Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Similar GMAT Doubts

Antibiotics are chemical substances that kill or inhibit the growth of bacteria. The success of antibiotics against disease-causing bacteria is one of modern medicine’s great achievements. However, many bacteria harmful to humans have developed ways to circumvent the effects of antibiotics, and many infectious diseases are now much more difficult to treat than they were just a few decades ago. Antibiotic resistance is an especially difficult problem for hospitals with critically ill patients who are less able to fight off infections without the help of antibiotics.Bacteria can develop antibiotic resistance because they have the ability to adapt quickly to new environmental conditions. Most commonly, bacteria share with each other genetic material called resistance plasmids; these shared plasmids, which contain the genetic code enabling antibiotic resistance, can spread throughout a bacterial population to create a strain of resistant bacteria. Less commonly, a natural mutation that enables antibiotic resistance takes place within the chromosome of the bacteria, and the resulting strain of bacteria can reproduce and become dominant via natural selection. In the absence of human involvement, however, bacteria in the wild rarely develop resistance to antibiotics.In the United States, animals raised on industrial-scale factory farms are routinely administered low levels of antibiotics in their feed not as a cure for ongoing maladies, but primarily as a growth-enhancing agent to produce more meat and also as a prophylactic measure to compensate for overcrowded and unsanitary conditions.Currently, several antibiotics that are used in human medical treatment are administered non-therapeutically to healthy livestock and poultry. Examples include tetracycline, penicillin and erythromycin. This long-term non-therapeutic feeding of antibiotics to animals creates the ideal conditions for the development of antibioticresistant bacteria, as it kills the susceptible bacteria while leaving the resistant strains to reproduce and flourish.Europe is far ahead of the United States in the responsible use of antibiotics: On January 1, 2006, the European Union banned the feeding of all antibiotics to livestock for nontherapeutic purposes. This sweeping policy follows a 1998 ban on the non-therapeutic use of four medically-important antibiotics on animals. The time has come for the United States to follow Europe’s lead.Q.Based on the information in the passage, which of the following statements can be inferred?

A team of researchers has been able to successfully study the highly complex molecular structure of mitoribosomes, which are the ribosomes of mitochondria. Ribosomes are found in the cells of all living organisms, and they serve as a primary location for biological protein synthesis, but certain organisms such as fungi, plants, animals, and humans contain much more complex ribosomes than bacteria do. In organisms with complex cells, ribosomes can also be divided into two types: those in the cytosol -- which comprises the majority of the cell -- and those found in the mitochondria or power houses of cells. Mitochondria are found only in eukaryotes. Every ribosome consists of two subunits. The smaller subunit uses transfer ribonucleic acids to decode the genetic code, which is stored in the DNA, it receives in the form of messenger ribonucleic acids, while the larger subunit joins the amino acids delivered by the transfer ribonucleic acids together like a string of pearls.Since they are found only in small amounts and are difficult to isolate, mitochondrial ribosomes or mitoribosomes are particularly difficult to study. But because of the recent technical advances in cryo-electron microscopy and the development of direct electron detection cameras that can correct for specimen motion during the exposure, it recently became possible to capture images of biomolecules at a resolution high enough to capture the details, especially those of the peptidyl transferase centre (PTC).This research is of special importance to producing the right kind of antibiotics for humans. PTC is where the amino acid building blocks are combined, leading to protein synthesis. As per the researchers, this process of synthesizing proteins is medically relevant as the tunnel through which the proteins pass, after being synthesized, is a target for specific antibiotics. The antibiotic blocks the tunnel, preventing the proteins that have just been synthesized from leaving the tunnel. However, for an antibiotic to be used in humans, it must not attack human ribosomes and should inhibit protein synthesis only in the ribosomes of bacteria. The problem arises since mitochondrial ribosomes resemble those of bacteria, which is why certain antibiotics also interfere with mitoribosomes, possibly leading to serious side effects. The findings of the research will make it possible in the future to design antibiotics that inhibit only bacterial and not mitochondrial ribosomes, the one basic requirement for using them in clinical applications.Which of the following can be inferred from the passage?

A team of researchers has been able to successfully study the highly complex molecular structure of mitoribosomes, which are the ribosomes of mitochondria. Ribosomes are found in the cells of all living organisms, and they serve as a primary location for biological protein synthesis, but certain organisms such as fungi, plants, animals, and humans contain much more complex ribosomes than bacteria do. In organisms with complex cells, ribosomes can also be divided into two types: those in the cytosol -- which comprises the majority of the cell -- and those found in the mitochondria or power houses of cells. Mitochondria are found only in eukaryotes. Every ribosome consists of two subunits. The smaller subunit uses transfer ribonucleic acids to decode the genetic code, which is stored in the DNA, it receives in the form of messenger ribonucleic acids, while the larger subunit joins the amino acids delivered by the transfer ribonucleic acids together like a string of pearls.Since they are found only in small amounts and are difficult to isolate, mitochondrial ribosomes or mitoribosomes are particularly difficult to study. But because of the recent technical advances in cryo-electron microscopy and the development of direct electron detection cameras that can correct for specimen motion during the exposure, it recently became possible to capture images of biomolecules at a resolution high enough to capture the details, especially those of the peptidyl transferase centre (PTC).This research is of special importance to producing the right kind of antibiotics for humans. PTC is where the amino acid building blocks are combined, leading to protein synthesis. As per the researchers, this process of synthesizing proteins is medically relevant as the tunnel through which the proteins pass, after being synthesized, is a target for specific antibiotics. The antibiotic blocks the tunnel, preventing the proteins that have just been synthesized from leaving the tunnel. However, for an antibiotic to be used in humans, it must not attack human ribosomes and should inhibit protein synthesis only in the ribosomes of bacteria. The problem arises since mitochondrial ribosomes resemble those of bacteria, which is why certain antibiotics also interfere with mitoribosomes, possibly leading to serious side effects. The findings of the research will make it possible in the future to design antibiotics that inhibit only bacterial and not mitochondrial ribosomes, the one basic requirement for using them in clinical applications.The author is primarily concerned with

Antibiotics are chemical substances that kill or inhibit the growth of bacteria. The success of antibiotics against disease-causing bacteria is one of modern medicine’s great achievements. However, many bacteria harmful to humans have developed ways to circumvent the effects of antibiotics, and many infectious diseases are now much more difficult to treat than they were just a few decades ago. Antibiotic resistance is an especially difficult problem for hospitals with critically ill patients who are less able to fight off infections without the help of antibiotics.Bacteria can develop antibiotic resistance because they have the ability to adapt quickly to new environmental conditions. Most commonly, bacteria share with each other genetic material called resistance plasmids; these shared plasmids, which contain the genetic code enabling antibiotic resistance, can spread throughout a bacterial population to create a strain of resistant bacteria. Less commonly, a natural mutation that enables antibiotic resistance takes place within the chromosome of the bacteria, and the resulting strain of bacteria can reproduce and become dominant via natural selection. In the absence of human involvement, however, bacteria in the wild rarely develop resistance to antibiotics.In the United States, animals raised on industrial-scale factory farms are routinely administered low levels of antibiotics in their feed not as a cure for ongoing maladies, but primarily as a growth-enhancing agent to produce more meat and also as a prophylactic measure to compensate for overcrowded and unsanitary conditions.Currently, several antibiotics that are used in human medical treatment are administered non-therapeutically to healthy livestock and poultry. Examples include tetracycline, penicillin and erythromycin. This long-term non-therapeutic feeding of antibiotics to animals creates the ideal conditions for the development of antibioticresistant bacteria, as it kills the susceptible bacteria while leaving the resistant strains to reproduce and flourish.Europe is far ahead of the United States in the responsible use of antibiotics: On January 1, 2006, the European Union banned the feeding of all antibiotics to livestock for nontherapeutic purposes. This sweeping policy follows a 1998 ban on the non-therapeutic use of four medically-important antibiotics on animals. The time has come for the United States to follow Europe’s lead.Q.Based on the information in the passage, to which of the following practices would the author most likely be opposed?

A team of researchers has been able to successfully study the highly complex molecular structure of mitoribosomes, which are the ribosomes of mitochondria. Ribosomes are found in the cells of all living organisms, and they serve as a primary location for biological protein synthesis, but certain organisms such as fungi, plants, animals, and humans contain much more complex ribosomes than bacteria do. In organisms with complex cells, ribosomes can also be divided into two types: those in the cytosol -- which comprises the majority of the cell -- and those found in the mitochondria or power houses of cells. Mitochondria are found only in eukaryotes. Every ribosome consists of two subunits. The smaller subunit uses transfer ribonucleic acids to decode the genetic code, which is stored in the DNA, it receives in the form of messenger ribonucleic acids, while the larger subunit joins the amino acids delivered by the transfer ribonucleic acids together like a string of pearls.Since they are found only in small amounts and are difficult to isolate, mitochondrial ribosomes or mitoribosomes are particularly difficult to study. But because of the recent technical advances in cryo-electron microscopy and the development of direct electron detection cameras that can correct for specimen motion during the exposure, it recently became possible to capture images of biomolecules at a resolution high enough to capture the details, especially those of the peptidyl transferase centre (PTC).This research is of special importance to producing the right kind of antibiotics for humans. PTC is where the amino acid building blocks are combined, leading to protein synthesis. As per the researchers, this process of synthesizing proteins is medically relevant as the tunnel through which the proteins pass, after being synthesized, is a target for specific antibiotics. The antibiotic blocks the tunnel, preventing the proteins that have just been synthesized from leaving the tunnel. However, for an antibiotic to be used in humans, it must not attack human ribosomes and should inhibit protein synthesis only in the ribosomes of bacteria. The problem arises since mitochondrial ribosomes resemble those of bacteria, which is why certain antibiotics also interfere with mitoribosomes, possibly leading to serious side effects. The findings of the research will make it possible in the future to design antibiotics that inhibit only bacterial and not mitochondrial ribosomes, the one basic requirement for using them in clinical applications.Which of the following is mentioned in the passage?

Top Courses for GMATView all

Top Courses for GMAT

Some legislators refuse to commit public funds for new scientific research if they cannot be assured that the research will contribute to the public welfare. Such a position ignores the lessons of experience. Many important contributions to the public welfare that resulted from scientific research were never predicted as potential outcomes of that research. Suppose that a scientist in the early twentieth century had applied for public funds to study molds: who would have predicted that such research would lead to the discovery of antibiotics—one of the greatest contributions ever made to the public welfare?Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the argument?a)The committal of public funds for new scientific research will ensure that the public welfare will be enhanced.b)If it were possible to predict the general outcome of a new scientific research effort, then legislators would not refuse to commit public funds for that effort.c)Scientific discoveries that have contributed to the public welfare would have occurred sooner if public funds had been committed to the research that generated those discoveries.d)In order to ensure that scientific research is directed toward contributing to the public welfare, legislators must commit public funds to new scientific research.e)Lack of guarantees that new scientific research will contribute to the public welfare is not sufficient reason for legislators to refuse to commit public funds to new scientific research.Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Some legislators refuse to commit public funds for new scientific research if they cannot be assured that the research will contribute to the public welfare. Such a position ignores the lessons of experience. Many important contributions to the public welfare that resulted from scientific research were never predicted as potential outcomes of that research. Suppose that a scientist in the early twentieth century had applied for public funds to study molds: who would have predicted that such research would lead to the discovery of antibiotics—one of the greatest contributions ever made to the public welfare?Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the argument?a)The committal of public funds for new scientific research will ensure that the public welfare will be enhanced.b)If it were possible to predict the general outcome of a new scientific research effort, then legislators would not refuse to commit public funds for that effort.c)Scientific discoveries that have contributed to the public welfare would have occurred sooner if public funds had been committed to the research that generated those discoveries.d)In order to ensure that scientific research is directed toward contributing to the public welfare, legislators must commit public funds to new scientific research.e)Lack of guarantees that new scientific research will contribute to the public welfare is not sufficient reason for legislators to refuse to commit public funds to new scientific research.Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? for GMAT 2024 is part of GMAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the GMAT exam syllabus. Information about Some legislators refuse to commit public funds for new scientific research if they cannot be assured that the research will contribute to the public welfare. Such a position ignores the lessons of experience. Many important contributions to the public welfare that resulted from scientific research were never predicted as potential outcomes of that research. Suppose that a scientist in the early twentieth century had applied for public funds to study molds: who would have predicted that such research would lead to the discovery of antibiotics—one of the greatest contributions ever made to the public welfare?Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the argument?a)The committal of public funds for new scientific research will ensure that the public welfare will be enhanced.b)If it were possible to predict the general outcome of a new scientific research effort, then legislators would not refuse to commit public funds for that effort.c)Scientific discoveries that have contributed to the public welfare would have occurred sooner if public funds had been committed to the research that generated those discoveries.d)In order to ensure that scientific research is directed toward contributing to the public welfare, legislators must commit public funds to new scientific research.e)Lack of guarantees that new scientific research will contribute to the public welfare is not sufficient reason for legislators to refuse to commit public funds to new scientific research.Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for GMAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Some legislators refuse to commit public funds for new scientific research if they cannot be assured that the research will contribute to the public welfare. Such a position ignores the lessons of experience. Many important contributions to the public welfare that resulted from scientific research were never predicted as potential outcomes of that research. Suppose that a scientist in the early twentieth century had applied for public funds to study molds: who would have predicted that such research would lead to the discovery of antibiotics—one of the greatest contributions ever made to the public welfare?Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the argument?a)The committal of public funds for new scientific research will ensure that the public welfare will be enhanced.b)If it were possible to predict the general outcome of a new scientific research effort, then legislators would not refuse to commit public funds for that effort.c)Scientific discoveries that have contributed to the public welfare would have occurred sooner if public funds had been committed to the research that generated those discoveries.d)In order to ensure that scientific research is directed toward contributing to the public welfare, legislators must commit public funds to new scientific research.e)Lack of guarantees that new scientific research will contribute to the public welfare is not sufficient reason for legislators to refuse to commit public funds to new scientific research.Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Some legislators refuse to commit public funds for new scientific research if they cannot be assured that the research will contribute to the public welfare. Such a position ignores the lessons of experience. Many important contributions to the public welfare that resulted from scientific research were never predicted as potential outcomes of that research. Suppose that a scientist in the early twentieth century had applied for public funds to study molds: who would have predicted that such research would lead to the discovery of antibiotics—one of the greatest contributions ever made to the public welfare?Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the argument?a)The committal of public funds for new scientific research will ensure that the public welfare will be enhanced.b)If it were possible to predict the general outcome of a new scientific research effort, then legislators would not refuse to commit public funds for that effort.c)Scientific discoveries that have contributed to the public welfare would have occurred sooner if public funds had been committed to the research that generated those discoveries.d)In order to ensure that scientific research is directed toward contributing to the public welfare, legislators must commit public funds to new scientific research.e)Lack of guarantees that new scientific research will contribute to the public welfare is not sufficient reason for legislators to refuse to commit public funds to new scientific research.Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for GMAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for GMAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Some legislators refuse to commit public funds for new scientific research if they cannot be assured that the research will contribute to the public welfare. Such a position ignores the lessons of experience. Many important contributions to the public welfare that resulted from scientific research were never predicted as potential outcomes of that research. Suppose that a scientist in the early twentieth century had applied for public funds to study molds: who would have predicted that such research would lead to the discovery of antibiotics—one of the greatest contributions ever made to the public welfare?Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the argument?a)The committal of public funds for new scientific research will ensure that the public welfare will be enhanced.b)If it were possible to predict the general outcome of a new scientific research effort, then legislators would not refuse to commit public funds for that effort.c)Scientific discoveries that have contributed to the public welfare would have occurred sooner if public funds had been committed to the research that generated those discoveries.d)In order to ensure that scientific research is directed toward contributing to the public welfare, legislators must commit public funds to new scientific research.e)Lack of guarantees that new scientific research will contribute to the public welfare is not sufficient reason for legislators to refuse to commit public funds to new scientific research.Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Some legislators refuse to commit public funds for new scientific research if they cannot be assured that the research will contribute to the public welfare. Such a position ignores the lessons of experience. Many important contributions to the public welfare that resulted from scientific research were never predicted as potential outcomes of that research. Suppose that a scientist in the early twentieth century had applied for public funds to study molds: who would have predicted that such research would lead to the discovery of antibiotics—one of the greatest contributions ever made to the public welfare?Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the argument?a)The committal of public funds for new scientific research will ensure that the public welfare will be enhanced.b)If it were possible to predict the general outcome of a new scientific research effort, then legislators would not refuse to commit public funds for that effort.c)Scientific discoveries that have contributed to the public welfare would have occurred sooner if public funds had been committed to the research that generated those discoveries.d)In order to ensure that scientific research is directed toward contributing to the public welfare, legislators must commit public funds to new scientific research.e)Lack of guarantees that new scientific research will contribute to the public welfare is not sufficient reason for legislators to refuse to commit public funds to new scientific research.Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Some legislators refuse to commit public funds for new scientific research if they cannot be assured that the research will contribute to the public welfare. Such a position ignores the lessons of experience. Many important contributions to the public welfare that resulted from scientific research were never predicted as potential outcomes of that research. Suppose that a scientist in the early twentieth century had applied for public funds to study molds: who would have predicted that such research would lead to the discovery of antibiotics—one of the greatest contributions ever made to the public welfare?Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the argument?a)The committal of public funds for new scientific research will ensure that the public welfare will be enhanced.b)If it were possible to predict the general outcome of a new scientific research effort, then legislators would not refuse to commit public funds for that effort.c)Scientific discoveries that have contributed to the public welfare would have occurred sooner if public funds had been committed to the research that generated those discoveries.d)In order to ensure that scientific research is directed toward contributing to the public welfare, legislators must commit public funds to new scientific research.e)Lack of guarantees that new scientific research will contribute to the public welfare is not sufficient reason for legislators to refuse to commit public funds to new scientific research.Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Some legislators refuse to commit public funds for new scientific research if they cannot be assured that the research will contribute to the public welfare. Such a position ignores the lessons of experience. Many important contributions to the public welfare that resulted from scientific research were never predicted as potential outcomes of that research. Suppose that a scientist in the early twentieth century had applied for public funds to study molds: who would have predicted that such research would lead to the discovery of antibiotics—one of the greatest contributions ever made to the public welfare?Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the argument?a)The committal of public funds for new scientific research will ensure that the public welfare will be enhanced.b)If it were possible to predict the general outcome of a new scientific research effort, then legislators would not refuse to commit public funds for that effort.c)Scientific discoveries that have contributed to the public welfare would have occurred sooner if public funds had been committed to the research that generated those discoveries.d)In order to ensure that scientific research is directed toward contributing to the public welfare, legislators must commit public funds to new scientific research.e)Lack of guarantees that new scientific research will contribute to the public welfare is not sufficient reason for legislators to refuse to commit public funds to new scientific research.Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Some legislators refuse to commit public funds for new scientific research if they cannot be assured that the research will contribute to the public welfare. Such a position ignores the lessons of experience. Many important contributions to the public welfare that resulted from scientific research were never predicted as potential outcomes of that research. Suppose that a scientist in the early twentieth century had applied for public funds to study molds: who would have predicted that such research would lead to the discovery of antibiotics—one of the greatest contributions ever made to the public welfare?Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the argument?a)The committal of public funds for new scientific research will ensure that the public welfare will be enhanced.b)If it were possible to predict the general outcome of a new scientific research effort, then legislators would not refuse to commit public funds for that effort.c)Scientific discoveries that have contributed to the public welfare would have occurred sooner if public funds had been committed to the research that generated those discoveries.d)In order to ensure that scientific research is directed toward contributing to the public welfare, legislators must commit public funds to new scientific research.e)Lack of guarantees that new scientific research will contribute to the public welfare is not sufficient reason for legislators to refuse to commit public funds to new scientific research.Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice GMAT tests.
Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Top Courses for GMAT

Explore Courses

Suggested Free Tests

Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev
Get App
© EduRev
Education Revolution
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup