Critical Reasoning

Scientist: Evolutionary biology has long held that the most attractive males of a species, defined as those with the highest quality physical traits that have no Darwinian survival value, will draw the most female mates. The resulting male offspring will inherit that attractiveness and themselves have more children as a result, thus ensuring widespread dissemination of the grandparents' genes. Recently, however, scientists have found that the sons of "high quality" male flycatchers failed to inherit the father's mating status. Further, the most attractive males were so busy mating that they neglected their offspring; as a result, the sons of homelier birds, who took better care of their offspring, had more success at propagating the species.

The two portions in boldface play which of the following roles in the scientist's argument?

The first is the conclusion of a theory disputed by the scientist; the second is the scientist's new contention based upon the latest evidence.

The first is a premise of a long-held biological theory; the second is an example of how this theory works.

The first is an explanation of how a biological theory is thought to work; the second is an example of research results that do not support this theory.

The first is an example of a theory that used to be prevalent; the second is the new theory that is now considered predominant by scientists.

The first introduces a long-held theory that the scientist is going to disprove; the second is the scientist's new theory to replace the one she disproved.



How is the second bold portion an example?C

A) Incorrect -- its not the scientist's contention...but that of the other scientists he/she was referring to in the paragraph
B) Incorrect -- The first can be construed a conclusion rather than a premise
C) Correct - Second is an example as the author refers to homelier birds. Notice that auth does not refer to any specific references in the first
D) Incorrect -- the first is definitely not an example
E) Incorrect - the scientist has not disproved anything but referring to other scientists that have.

C should be the right answer.

IMO C

Got it right This time, C,
Very interesting question.

Any one who says that CR is Boring must solve this one.

singhsa wrote:Scientist: Evolutionary biology has long held that the most attractive males of a species, defined as those with the highest quality physical traits that have no Darwinian survival value, will draw the most female mates. The resulting male offspring will inherit that attractiveness and themselves have more children as a result, thus ensuring widespread dissemination of the grandparents' genes. Recently, however, scientists have found that the sons of "high quality" male flycatchers failed to inherit the father's mating status. Further, the most attractive males were so busy mating that they neglected their offspring; as a result, the sons of homelier birds, who took better care of their offspring, had more success at propagating the species.

The two portions in boldface play which of the following roles in the scientist's argument?

The first is the conclusion of a theory disputed by the scientist; the second is the scientist's new contention based upon the latest evidence.

The first is a premise of a long-held biological theory; the second is an example of how this theory works.

The first is an explanation of how a biological theory is thought to work; the second is an example of research results that do not support this theory.

The first is an example of a theory that used to be prevalent; the second is the new theory that is now considered predominant by scientists.

The first introduces a long-held theory that the scientist is going to disprove; the second is the scientist's new theory to replace the one she disproved.



How is the second bold portion an example?C

The second is an example because it uses flycatcher, a type of bird to provide a counter evidence against an established theory. The theory is about all species in general.