TestMagic

kfree · 10-05-2003, 11:41 AM

Hi All,
My analysis of this question is different from the answer and I am not convinced by the answer given in PowerPrep. Please give me your comment. Thx.

For centuries animals have been used as _____ for people in experiements to assess the effects of therapeutic and other agents that might later be used in humans.
(A) benefactors
(B) companions
(C) examples
(D) precedents
(E) surrogates

I selected (D) based on "later be used in humans." However, the answer is surrogates. Why? Why not? please comment.

Vinay · 10-05-2003, 12:35 PM

precedents mean ancestors which do not exist now. you cannot use something on ppl tht no longer exist. ;-)

kfree · 10-05-2003, 01:50 PM

Hi, Vinay, thx for the reply

I checked my dictionary(M-W) for the definition of precedent:
1. an earlier occurrence of something similar
2. a: something done or said that may serve as an example or rule to authorize or justify a subsequent act of the same or an analogous kind <a verdict that had no precedent> b: the convention estabilished by such a precendent or by long practice
3. a person or thing that serves as a model

I thought one of those definitions would fit.
I need to sleep now, WAY past bed time, please comment and I will return later.

doodlee · 10-05-2003, 06:23 PM

Hey Kfree and Vinay,
Surrogate is something that replaces the real thing. (Like we have surrogate mothers) In this case, animals are taking the place of humans.
Precedent refers more to time or so I thought. Its more like a code.

For instance, if I set an example by studying hard, I am setting a precedent for everyone who comes after me. but if I am operated upon to practice for an operation that is to take place for my brother, then I am merely a substitute or a surrogate for him. (What a gruesome example!) HTH

kfree · 10-05-2003, 09:38 PM

HI doodlee, I agree that surrogate fits in the blank. But why doesn't precedent fit?? What makes it a bad choice? I also have trouble ruling out "examples".
Why are they not the answer?

rumen · 10-06-2003, 07:41 AM

Hallo Kfree I think that it is important to get the idea behind the sentence since you will know what kind of word you can use to fiil in the ´blank. In this sentence it is quite clear that animals have been used as substitutes for humans, to test medicines. With "precedents" it is implieed that animals are no longer used and that humans MAY be are, which is not impied nowhere in the sentence....think you can make something out of this

kfree · 10-06-2003, 07:49 AM

Hi, rumen,
I re-checked my dictionary. I think it is beginning to make sense. "precedent" can be used on events that happened before or on models. Don't fit in the sentence. But I am confused. Both you and Vinay refer that precedent is something that no longer exist or used!! ?? But I can't find that in my dictionary!??

doodlee · 10-07-2003, 05:11 PM

Hey KFree,
see if this explanation helps any
For an action becomes a precedent quite by co-incidence. Take the example of a murder case that is tried in court. no one working on the case knew for sure that that particular case would serve as a precedent for other courts to use in future right? that courts eventually do use this case as a formula or code is a mere by product.

now take the case of a scientist performing an experiment on an animal. this person actually intends for the animal to sort of act like a human no? so the result here is not the by product but the essense of the whole experiment.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

10-05-2003, 11:41 AM	#1 (permalink)
kfree out to see the world! Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: somewhere out there~~~ Posts: 538	Hi All, My analysis of this question is different from the answer and I am not convinced by the answer given in PowerPrep. Please give me your comment. Thx. For centuries animals have been used as _____ for people in experiements to assess the effects of therapeutic and other agents that might later be used in humans. (A) benefactors (B) companions (C) examples (D) precedents (E) surrogates I selected (D) based on "later be used in humans." However, the answer is surrogates. Why? Why not? please comment.

10-05-2003, 12:35 PM	#2 (permalink)
Vinay TestMagic Guru-in-Training Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: India Posts: 766	precedents mean ancestors which do not exist now. you cannot use something on ppl tht no longer exist. ;-)

10-05-2003, 01:50 PM	#3 (permalink)
kfree out to see the world! Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: somewhere out there~~~ Posts: 538	Hi, Vinay, thx for the reply I checked my dictionary(M-W) for the definition of precedent: 1. an earlier occurrence of something similar 2. a: something done or said that may serve as an example or rule to authorize or justify a subsequent act of the same or an analogous kind <a verdict that had no precedent> b: the convention estabilished by such a precendent or by long practice 3. a person or thing that serves as a model I thought one of those definitions would fit. I need to sleep now, WAY past bed time, please comment and I will return later.

10-05-2003, 06:23 PM	#4 (permalink)
doodlee Eager! Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 50	Hey Kfree and Vinay, Surrogate is something that replaces the real thing. (Like we have surrogate mothers) In this case, animals are taking the place of humans. Precedent refers more to time or so I thought. Its more like a code. For instance, if I set an example by studying hard, I am setting a precedent for everyone who comes after me. but if I am operated upon to practice for an operation that is to take place for my brother, then I am merely a substitute or a surrogate for him. (What a gruesome example!) HTH

10-05-2003, 09:38 PM	#5 (permalink)
kfree out to see the world! Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: somewhere out there~~~ Posts: 538	HI doodlee, I agree that surrogate fits in the blank. But why doesn't precedent fit?? What makes it a bad choice? I also have trouble ruling out "examples". Why are they not the answer?

10-06-2003, 07:41 AM	#6 (permalink)
rumen Within my grasp! Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 427	Hallo Kfree I think that it is important to get the idea behind the sentence since you will know what kind of word you can use to fiil in the ´blank. In this sentence it is quite clear that animals have been used as substitutes for humans, to test medicines. With "precedents" it is implieed that animals are no longer used and that humans MAY be are, which is not impied nowhere in the sentence....think you can make something out of this

10-06-2003, 07:49 AM	#7 (permalink)
kfree out to see the world! Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: somewhere out there~~~ Posts: 538	Hi, rumen, I re-checked my dictionary. I think it is beginning to make sense. "precedent" can be used on events that happened before or on models. Don't fit in the sentence. But I am confused. Both you and Vinay refer that precedent is something that no longer exist or used!! ?? But I can't find that in my dictionary!??

10-07-2003, 05:11 PM	#8 (permalink)
doodlee Eager! Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 50	Hey KFree, see if this explanation helps any For an action becomes a precedent quite by co-incidence. Take the example of a murder case that is tried in court. no one working on the case knew for sure that that particular case would serve as a precedent for other courts to use in future right? that courts eventually do use this case as a formula or code is a mere by product. now take the case of a scientist performing an experiment on an animal. this person actually intends for the animal to sort of act like a human no? so the result here is not the by product but the essense of the whole experiment.

TestMagic

Free GMAT, GRE, SAT Test, TOEFL practice tests