Skip to main contentSkip to solution

Five jumbled up sentences (labelled 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5), related to a topic, are given below. Four of them can be put together to form a coherent paragraph. Identify the odd sentence and key in the number of that sentence as your answer.

  1. The care with which philosophers examine arguments for and against forms of biotechnology makes this an excellent primer on formulating and assessing moral arguments.
  2. Although most people find at least some forms of genetic engineering disquieting, it is not easy to articulate why: what is wrong with re-engineering our nature?
  3. Breakthroughs in genetics present us with the promise that we will soon be able to prevent a host of debilitating diseases, and the predicament that our newfound genetic knowledge may enable us to enhance our genetic traits.
  4. To grapple with the ethics of enhancement, we need to confront questions that verge on theology, which is why modern philosophers and political theorists tend to shrink from them.
  5. One argument is that the drive for human perfection through genetics is objectionable as it represents a bid for mastery that fails to appreciate the gifts of human powers and achievements.

Entered answer:

Solution

✅ Correct Answer: 1

Step 1: Look for the main topic → All sentences discuss genetics/genetic enhancement and philosophical arguments around it.

Step 2: Find which sentences connect naturally → Look for logical flow and consistent ideas.

From passage:

"Breakthroughs in genetics present us with the promise that we will soon be able to prevent a host of debilitating diseases, and the predicament that our newfound genetic knowledge may enable us to enhance our genetic traits."

"To grapple with the ethics of enhancement, we need to confront questions that verge on theology, which is why modern philosophers and political theorists tend to shrink from them."

Thought Process:

Sentence 3 introduces genetic enhancement → Sentence 2 explains why people find it troubling → Sentence 4 explains why philosophers avoid these hard questions → Sentence 5 gives one specific argument against enhancement.

These 4 sentences (2,3,4,5) flow together perfectly!


The Key Contradiction:

Sentence 4 says philosophers "shrink from" these questions

BUT

Sentence 1 says philosophers examine these arguments with "care"

This is a direct contradiction! One says they avoid, the other says they carefully study.


Since there are no options given in this question format, the answer is simply identifying which sentence number doesn't fit.

Answer: Sentence 1 is the odd one out because it contradicts the idea that philosophers avoid these difficult questions, instead claiming they examine them carefully.

Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Left arrow: Previous question
  • Right arrow: Next question
  • S key: Jump to solution
  • Q key: Jump to question