Fact, Inference, and Judgement Practice

Fact, Inference, and Judgement 40 / 50

The following question has a set of four statements. Each statement can be classified as one of the following:
(i) Facts, which deal with pieces of information that one has heard, seen or read, and which are open to discovery or verification (the answer option indicates such a statement with an F)
(ii) Inferences, which are conclusions drawn about the unknown, on the basis of the known (the answer option indicates such a statement with an I)
(iii) Judgements, which are opinions that imply approval or disapproval of persons, objects, situations and occurrences in the past, the present or the future (the answer option indicates such a statement with a J)
Identify the Fact (F), Judgement (J) and Inference (I) from these sentences.

Statements:

1. The clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPR-Cas9) system, originally identified as a prokaryotic adaptive immune mechanism, has revolutionized genetic engineering by enabling targeted gene editing with unprecedented precision and efficiency.
2. Given the rapid advancements in human germline editing capabilities and the absence of universally enforced regulatory frameworks, it is probable that future generations will experience significant disparities in health and cognitive aptitudes based on socioeconomic access to these technologies.
3. The very notion of 'correcting' human traits through germline interventions reflects an ethically fraught path, undermining natural human diversity and perpetuating eugenic ideologies disguised as therapeutic progress.
4. In 2018, a Chinese scientist controversially announced the birth of genetically edited twin girls, Lulu and Nana, whose CCR5 gene had allegedly been altered to confer HIV resistance.

Options:
(A) FIJF
(B) FJJI
(C) IFJF
(D) JIFI
(E) FIFJ

Correct Answer: A

1. Statement 1 Analysis: This is a Fact (F). It describes a scientific tool (CRISPR-Cas9), its origin, and its widely acknowledged impact in the field of genetic engineering. The terms "revolutionized" and "unprecedented precision and efficiency" are descriptive of its empirically verifiable and accepted capabilities within the scientific community, not subjective opinions.

2. Statement 2 Analysis: This is an Inference (I). It draws a conclusion about a future, unknown outcome ("future generations will experience significant disparities") based on existing facts ("rapid advancements," "absence of universally enforced regulatory frameworks"). The use of "it is probable" clearly signals a logical projection or expectation, rather than a definitive statement of fact or a personal value judgment.

3. Statement 3 Analysis: This is a Judgement (J). The statement expresses a clear disapproval and moral evaluation of germline interventions through strong qualitative language such as "ethically fraught path," "undermining natural human diversity," and "perpetuating eugenic ideologies disguised as therapeutic progress." These phrases convey a subjective opinion on the inherent morality and implications of such practices.

4. Statement 4 Analysis: This is a Fact (F). It details a specific, verifiable historical event, including the year, a key actor (Chinese scientist), the subjects (Lulu and Nana), and the alleged genetic modification. The term "controversially announced" refers to the documented factual reaction surrounding the announcement, not the author's personal judgment on the event itself.

Logical Trap: A common logical trap in this set lies in Statement 1. Students might incorrectly classify it as a Judgement due to the strong adjectives like "revolutionized" or "unprecedented." However, in scientific discourse, such terms are often used descriptively to convey the verifiable and universally recognized magnitude of an advancement, rather than as a subjective approval or disapproval. Similarly, in Statement 4, the word "controversially" describes the factual context of the announcement (that it was met with controversy), not the author's opinion on whether the announcement *should* have been controversial.

← →

Keep Learning?