Test Prep GMAT Section 3 - GMAT Section 3: Verbal Ability Exam
Page: 1 / 152
Total 759 questions
Question #1 (Topic: Reading Comprehension Questions)
Read the passage carefully and then choose the best answer to each question. Answer the question based upon what is stated or implied in the reading passage.
In Ursula LeGuin’s short story “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas,†everyone in the city of Omelas is happy â€" everyone, that is, except the child who is kept
locked in a basement closet. The child is left entirely alone and neglected except for occasional visits from the citizens of Omelas. They come at a certain age as a
rite of initiation, to learn the secret of the happiness they enjoy. They come to learn that their happiness has a price: the suffering of an innocent child. In the end,
most people stay in Omelas; but a few, unable to bear the fact that they are responsible for the suffering of that child, reject this utopia built upon a utilitarian
morality.
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory based upon the belief that happiness is the ultimate good and that people should use happiness as the measure for determining
right and wrong. For utilitarian, the right thing to do is that which will bring about the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. Furthermore,
utilitarianism argues that the intention of people’s actions does not matter; only the consequences of their actions are morally relevant, because only the
consequences determine how much happiness is produced.
Although many useful social policies and much legislation are founded on this “greatest good†philosophy, utilitarianism can be problematic as a basis for morality.
First, happiness is not so easy to quantify, and any measurement is bound to be subjective. Second, in a theory that treats everything except happiness as
instrumentally rather than intrinsically valuable, anything â€" or, more importantly, anyone â€" can (and should) be treated as a means to an end, if it means greater
happiness. This rejects the notion that human beings have their own intrinsic value. Further, utilitarianism puts the burden of the happiness of the masses on the
suffering of the few. Is the happiness of many worth the suffering of a few? Why do those few deserve to suffer? Isn’t this burden of suffering morally
irresponsible? This is the dilemma so brilliantly illustrated in LeGuin’s story.
Which of the following best sums up the author’s opinion of utilitarianism?
In Ursula LeGuin’s short story “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas,†everyone in the city of Omelas is happy â€" everyone, that is, except the child who is kept
locked in a basement closet. The child is left entirely alone and neglected except for occasional visits from the citizens of Omelas. They come at a certain age as a
rite of initiation, to learn the secret of the happiness they enjoy. They come to learn that their happiness has a price: the suffering of an innocent child. In the end,
most people stay in Omelas; but a few, unable to bear the fact that they are responsible for the suffering of that child, reject this utopia built upon a utilitarian
morality.
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory based upon the belief that happiness is the ultimate good and that people should use happiness as the measure for determining
right and wrong. For utilitarian, the right thing to do is that which will bring about the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. Furthermore,
utilitarianism argues that the intention of people’s actions does not matter; only the consequences of their actions are morally relevant, because only the
consequences determine how much happiness is produced.
Although many useful social policies and much legislation are founded on this “greatest good†philosophy, utilitarianism can be problematic as a basis for morality.
First, happiness is not so easy to quantify, and any measurement is bound to be subjective. Second, in a theory that treats everything except happiness as
instrumentally rather than intrinsically valuable, anything â€" or, more importantly, anyone â€" can (and should) be treated as a means to an end, if it means greater
happiness. This rejects the notion that human beings have their own intrinsic value. Further, utilitarianism puts the burden of the happiness of the masses on the
suffering of the few. Is the happiness of many worth the suffering of a few? Why do those few deserve to suffer? Isn’t this burden of suffering morally
irresponsible? This is the dilemma so brilliantly illustrated in LeGuin’s story.
Which of the following best sums up the author’s opinion of utilitarianism?
A. It is an ethical theory.
B. It is the ethical theory that people should all live by.
C. It is a useful but problematic ethical theory.
D. It does not adequately measure happiness.
E. It underestimates the intrinsic value of human beings.
Answer: C
Question #2 (Topic: Reading Comprehension Questions)
Read the passage carefully and then choose the best answer to each question. Answer the question based upon what is stated or implied in the reading passage.
In Ursula LeGuin’s short story “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas,†everyone in the city of Omelas is happy â€" everyone, that is, except the child who is kept
locked in a basement closet. The child is left entirely alone and neglected except for occasional visits from the citizens of Omelas. They come at a certain age as a
rite of initiation, to learn the secret of the happiness they enjoy. They come to learn that their happiness has a price: the suffering of an innocent child. In the end,
most people stay in Omelas; but a few, unable to bear the fact that they are responsible for the suffering of that child, reject this utopia built upon a utilitarian
morality.
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory based upon the belief that happiness is the ultimate good and that people should use happiness as the measure for determining
right and wrong. For utilitarian, the right thing to do is that which will bring about the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. Furthermore,
utilitarianism argues that the intention of people’s actions does not matter; only the consequences of their actions are morally relevant, because only the
consequences determine how much happiness is produced.
Although many useful social policies and much legislation are founded on this “greatest good†philosophy, utilitarianism can be problematic as a basis for morality.
First, happiness is not so easy to quantify, and any measurement is bound to be subjective. Second, in a theory that treats everything except happiness as
instrumentally rather than intrinsically valuable, anything â€" or, more importantly, anyone â€" can (and should) be treated as a means to an end, if it means greater
happiness. This rejects the notion that human beings have their own intrinsic value. Further, utilitarianism puts the burden of the happiness of the masses on the
suffering of the few. Is the happiness of many worth the suffering of a few? Why do those few deserve to suffer? Isn’t this burden of suffering morally
irresponsible? This is the dilemma so brilliantly illustrated in LeGuin’s story.
According to the passage, in utilitarianism
In Ursula LeGuin’s short story “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas,†everyone in the city of Omelas is happy â€" everyone, that is, except the child who is kept
locked in a basement closet. The child is left entirely alone and neglected except for occasional visits from the citizens of Omelas. They come at a certain age as a
rite of initiation, to learn the secret of the happiness they enjoy. They come to learn that their happiness has a price: the suffering of an innocent child. In the end,
most people stay in Omelas; but a few, unable to bear the fact that they are responsible for the suffering of that child, reject this utopia built upon a utilitarian
morality.
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory based upon the belief that happiness is the ultimate good and that people should use happiness as the measure for determining
right and wrong. For utilitarian, the right thing to do is that which will bring about the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. Furthermore,
utilitarianism argues that the intention of people’s actions does not matter; only the consequences of their actions are morally relevant, because only the
consequences determine how much happiness is produced.
Although many useful social policies and much legislation are founded on this “greatest good†philosophy, utilitarianism can be problematic as a basis for morality.
First, happiness is not so easy to quantify, and any measurement is bound to be subjective. Second, in a theory that treats everything except happiness as
instrumentally rather than intrinsically valuable, anything â€" or, more importantly, anyone â€" can (and should) be treated as a means to an end, if it means greater
happiness. This rejects the notion that human beings have their own intrinsic value. Further, utilitarianism puts the burden of the happiness of the masses on the
suffering of the few. Is the happiness of many worth the suffering of a few? Why do those few deserve to suffer? Isn’t this burden of suffering morally
irresponsible? This is the dilemma so brilliantly illustrated in LeGuin’s story.
According to the passage, in utilitarianism
A. only intentions have moral significance.
B. consequences are important, but intentions are more important.
C. intentions and consequences are equally important.
D. intentions are important, but consequences are more important.
E. only consequences have moral significance.
Answer: E
Question #3 (Topic: Reading Comprehension Questions)
Read the passage carefully and then choose the best answer to each question. Answer the question based upon what is stated or implied in the reading passage.
In Ursula LeGuin’s short story “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas,†everyone in the city of Omelas is happy â€" everyone, that is, except the child who is kept
locked in a basement closet. The child is left entirely alone and neglected except for occasional visits from the citizens of Omelas. They come at a certain age as a
rite of initiation, to learn the secret of the happiness they enjoy. They come to learn that their happiness has a price: the suffering of an innocent child. In the end,
most people stay in Omelas; but a few, unable to bear the fact that they are responsible for the suffering of that child, reject this utopia built upon a utilitarian
morality.
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory based upon the belief that happiness is the ultimate good and that people should use happiness as the measure for determining
right and wrong. For utilitarian, the right thing to do is that which will bring about the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. Furthermore,
utilitarianism argues that the intention of people’s actions does not matter; only the consequences of their actions are morally relevant, because only the
consequences determine how much happiness is produced.
Although many useful social policies and much legislation are founded on this “greatest good†philosophy, utilitarianism can be problematic as a basis for morality.
First, happiness is not so easy to quantify, and any measurement is bound to be subjective. Second, in a theory that treats everything except happiness as
instrumentally rather than intrinsically valuable, anything â€" or, more importantly, anyone â€" can (and should) be treated as a means to an end, if it means greater
happiness. This rejects the notion that human beings have their own intrinsic value. Further, utilitarianism puts the burden of the happiness of the masses on the
suffering of the few. Is the happiness of many worth the suffering of a few? Why do those few deserve to suffer? Isn’t this burden of suffering morally
irresponsible? This is the dilemma so brilliantly illustrated in LeGuin’s story.
The author summarizes LeGuin’s story primarily to
In Ursula LeGuin’s short story “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas,†everyone in the city of Omelas is happy â€" everyone, that is, except the child who is kept
locked in a basement closet. The child is left entirely alone and neglected except for occasional visits from the citizens of Omelas. They come at a certain age as a
rite of initiation, to learn the secret of the happiness they enjoy. They come to learn that their happiness has a price: the suffering of an innocent child. In the end,
most people stay in Omelas; but a few, unable to bear the fact that they are responsible for the suffering of that child, reject this utopia built upon a utilitarian
morality.
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory based upon the belief that happiness is the ultimate good and that people should use happiness as the measure for determining
right and wrong. For utilitarian, the right thing to do is that which will bring about the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. Furthermore,
utilitarianism argues that the intention of people’s actions does not matter; only the consequences of their actions are morally relevant, because only the
consequences determine how much happiness is produced.
Although many useful social policies and much legislation are founded on this “greatest good†philosophy, utilitarianism can be problematic as a basis for morality.
First, happiness is not so easy to quantify, and any measurement is bound to be subjective. Second, in a theory that treats everything except happiness as
instrumentally rather than intrinsically valuable, anything â€" or, more importantly, anyone â€" can (and should) be treated as a means to an end, if it means greater
happiness. This rejects the notion that human beings have their own intrinsic value. Further, utilitarianism puts the burden of the happiness of the masses on the
suffering of the few. Is the happiness of many worth the suffering of a few? Why do those few deserve to suffer? Isn’t this burden of suffering morally
irresponsible? This is the dilemma so brilliantly illustrated in LeGuin’s story.
The author summarizes LeGuin’s story primarily to
A. show how good the story is.
B. get readers interested in the story.
C. illustrates the power of words.
D. illustrates the central problem with utilitarianism.
E. illustrates a utilitarian utopia.
Answer: D
Question #4 (Topic: Reading Comprehension Questions)
Read the passage carefully and then choose the best answer to each question. Answer the question based upon what is stated or implied in the reading passage.
In Ursula LeGuin’s short story “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas,†everyone in the city of Omelas is happy â€" everyone, that is, except the child who is kept
locked in a basement closet. The child is left entirely alone and neglected except for occasional visits from the citizens of Omelas. They come at a certain age as a
rite of initiation, to learn the secret of the happiness they enjoy. They come to learn that their happiness has a price: the suffering of an innocent child. In the end,
most people stay in Omelas; but a few, unable to bear the fact that they are responsible for the suffering of that child, reject this utopia built upon a utilitarian
morality.
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory based upon the belief that happiness is the ultimate good and that people should use happiness as the measure for determining
right and wrong. For utilitarian, the right thing to do is that which will bring about the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. Furthermore,
utilitarianism argues that the intention of people’s actions does not matter; only the consequences of their actions are morally relevant, because only the
consequences determine how much happiness is produced.
Although many useful social policies and much legislation are founded on this “greatest good†philosophy, utilitarianism can be problematic as a basis for morality.
First, happiness is not so easy to quantify, and any measurement is bound to be subjective. Second, in a theory that treats everything except happiness as
instrumentally rather than intrinsically valuable, anything â€" or, more importantly, anyone â€" can (and should) be treated as a means to an end, if it means greater
happiness. This rejects the notion that human beings have their own intrinsic value. Further, utilitarianism puts the burden of the happiness of the masses on the
suffering of the few. Is the happiness of many worth the suffering of a few? Why do those few deserve to suffer? Isn’t this burden of suffering morally
irresponsible? This is the dilemma so brilliantly illustrated in LeGuin’s story.
From the passage, it can be inferred that the author
In Ursula LeGuin’s short story “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas,†everyone in the city of Omelas is happy â€" everyone, that is, except the child who is kept
locked in a basement closet. The child is left entirely alone and neglected except for occasional visits from the citizens of Omelas. They come at a certain age as a
rite of initiation, to learn the secret of the happiness they enjoy. They come to learn that their happiness has a price: the suffering of an innocent child. In the end,
most people stay in Omelas; but a few, unable to bear the fact that they are responsible for the suffering of that child, reject this utopia built upon a utilitarian
morality.
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory based upon the belief that happiness is the ultimate good and that people should use happiness as the measure for determining
right and wrong. For utilitarian, the right thing to do is that which will bring about the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. Furthermore,
utilitarianism argues that the intention of people’s actions does not matter; only the consequences of their actions are morally relevant, because only the
consequences determine how much happiness is produced.
Although many useful social policies and much legislation are founded on this “greatest good†philosophy, utilitarianism can be problematic as a basis for morality.
First, happiness is not so easy to quantify, and any measurement is bound to be subjective. Second, in a theory that treats everything except happiness as
instrumentally rather than intrinsically valuable, anything â€" or, more importantly, anyone â€" can (and should) be treated as a means to an end, if it means greater
happiness. This rejects the notion that human beings have their own intrinsic value. Further, utilitarianism puts the burden of the happiness of the masses on the
suffering of the few. Is the happiness of many worth the suffering of a few? Why do those few deserve to suffer? Isn’t this burden of suffering morally
irresponsible? This is the dilemma so brilliantly illustrated in LeGuin’s story.
From the passage, it can be inferred that the author
A. may use utilitarianism occasionally but not as a guiding moral principle.
B. would never use utilitarianism to make a decision about what is right or wrong.
C. uses utilitarianism regularly to make moral decisions.
D. believes utilitarianism is a good basis for social policy.
E. thinks most people do not really understand utilitarianism.
Answer: A
Question #5 (Topic: Reading Comprehension Questions)
Read the passage carefully and then choose the best answer to each question. Answer the question based upon what is stated or implied in the reading passage.
In Ursula LeGuin’s short story “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas,†everyone in the city of Omelas is happy â€" everyone, that is, except the child who is kept
locked in a basement closet. The child is left entirely alone and neglected except for occasional visits from the citizens of Omelas. They come at a certain age as a
rite of initiation, to learn the secret of the happiness they enjoy. They come to learn that their happiness has a price: the suffering of an innocent child. In the end,
most people stay in Omelas; but a few, unable to bear the fact that they are responsible for the suffering of that child, reject this utopia built upon a utilitarian
morality.
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory based upon the belief that happiness is the ultimate good and that people should use happiness as the measure for determining
right and wrong. For utilitarian, the right thing to do is that which will bring about the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. Furthermore,
utilitarianism argues that the intention of people’s actions does not matter; only the consequences of their actions are morally relevant, because only the
consequences determine how much happiness is produced.
Although many useful social policies and much legislation are founded on this “greatest good†philosophy, utilitarianism can be problematic as a basis for morality.
First, happiness is not so easy to quantify, and any measurement is bound to be subjective. Second, in a theory that treats everything except happiness as
instrumentally rather than intrinsically valuable, anything â€" or, more importantly, anyone â€" can (and should) be treated as a means to an end, if it means greater
happiness. This rejects the notion that human beings have their own intrinsic value. Further, utilitarianism puts the burden of the happiness of the masses on the
suffering of the few. Is the happiness of many worth the suffering of a few? Why do those few deserve to suffer? Isn’t this burden of suffering morally
irresponsible? This is the dilemma so brilliantly illustrated in LeGuin’s story.
From the author’s summary of LeGuin’s story, the reader can infer that
In Ursula LeGuin’s short story “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas,†everyone in the city of Omelas is happy â€" everyone, that is, except the child who is kept
locked in a basement closet. The child is left entirely alone and neglected except for occasional visits from the citizens of Omelas. They come at a certain age as a
rite of initiation, to learn the secret of the happiness they enjoy. They come to learn that their happiness has a price: the suffering of an innocent child. In the end,
most people stay in Omelas; but a few, unable to bear the fact that they are responsible for the suffering of that child, reject this utopia built upon a utilitarian
morality.
Utilitarianism is an ethical theory based upon the belief that happiness is the ultimate good and that people should use happiness as the measure for determining
right and wrong. For utilitarian, the right thing to do is that which will bring about the greatest amount of happiness for the greatest number of people. Furthermore,
utilitarianism argues that the intention of people’s actions does not matter; only the consequences of their actions are morally relevant, because only the
consequences determine how much happiness is produced.
Although many useful social policies and much legislation are founded on this “greatest good†philosophy, utilitarianism can be problematic as a basis for morality.
First, happiness is not so easy to quantify, and any measurement is bound to be subjective. Second, in a theory that treats everything except happiness as
instrumentally rather than intrinsically valuable, anything â€" or, more importantly, anyone â€" can (and should) be treated as a means to an end, if it means greater
happiness. This rejects the notion that human beings have their own intrinsic value. Further, utilitarianism puts the burden of the happiness of the masses on the
suffering of the few. Is the happiness of many worth the suffering of a few? Why do those few deserve to suffer? Isn’t this burden of suffering morally
irresponsible? This is the dilemma so brilliantly illustrated in LeGuin’s story.
From the author’s summary of LeGuin’s story, the reader can infer that
A. most people in Omelas are utilitarian.
B. most people in Omelas reject utilitarianism.
C. everyone in Omelas is happy.
D. the child willingly sacrifices himself for others.
E. LeGuin is a popular science-fiction writer.
Answer: A
