Option A -INCORRECT.
The laws of physics by using pure mathematics is a similar assumption base on the living things in comparison in this reasoning. Physics and Mathematics are comparable because they both deal with calculations but they are not to be compared to living things.

Option B - INCORRECT.
''What a fish is by listing its chemical component'', A fish does have chemical components but this components are not on parallel thinking with the assumption of what living things are.

Option C - INCORRECT.
Animals are living things so as plants but the basis of this discussion is the comparison between provable living things and assumed living things.

Option D - INCORRECT.
The assumption in this discussion is based on comparing mechanical instrument such as ''Machines'' to living things, but this option is examining a Machine to a sketch of it which both are assumed to be Non-Living things.

Option E - CORRECT.
The statement in this option has logically complete the passage and the assumption of the Biologists. Comparison of a mammal by examining a zebra is a very good example of a living thing, because they are both living things that can reproduce.

BTGmoderatorDC wrote:Biologists with a predilection for theory have tried-and largely failed-to define what it is that makes something a living thing. Organisms take in energy-providing materials and excrete waste products, but so do automobiles. Living things replicate and take part in evolution, but so do some computer programs. We must be open to the possibility that there are living things on other planets. Therefore, we will not be successful in defining what it is that makes something a living thing merely by examining living things on Earth-the only ones we know. Trying to do so is analogous to trying to specify _______.

Which of the following most logically completes the passage?


A. the laws of physics by using pure mathematics

B. what a fish is by listing its chemical components

C. what an animal is by examining a plant

D. what a machine is by examining a sketch of it

E. what a mammal is by examining a zebra

Passage:
We must be open to the possibility that there are living things on other planets. Therefore, we will not be successful in defining what it is that makes something a living thing merely by examining living things on Earth.
The statement in blue suggests the following:
We cannot define an ENTIRE CATEGORY (living things) by examining ONE SUBGROUP OF THAT CATEGORY (living things on Earth).
The correct answer must employ the same logic as the statement in blue.
Only E employs the same logic:
The statement in blue is analogous to trying to specify what a mammal is -- in other words, trying to define an ENTIRE CATEGORY -- by examining a zebra (ONE SUBGROUP OF THAT CATEGORY).

The correct answer is E.