Marine biologists had hypothesized that lobsters kept together in lobster traps eat one another in response to hunger. Periodic checking of lobster traps, however, has revealed instances of lobsters sharing traps together for weeks. Eight lobsters even shared one trap together for two months without eating one another. The marine biologists’ hypothesis, therefore, is clearly wrong.
MB: lobster eat each other when trapped in response to hunger
Author: MB is wrong. 8 lobsters did not eat each other in the same trap for 2 months.
What is the missing link here? Author's argument based on the fact that the lobsters did not eat each other without any other concern explicitly stated. MB claimed that the lobsters eat each other in response to HUNGER. Author's conclusion must connect this point with his premise; it has to do something with HUNGER.
The argument against the marine biologists’ hypothesis is based on which one of the following assumptions?
Quote:
(A) Lobsters not caught in lobster traps have been observed eating one another.
The situation is when the lobsters are TRAPPED and HUNGRY.(A) is out.
Quote:
(B) Two months is the longest known period during which eight or more lobsters have been trapped together.
Trapped time is irrelevant. The argument is only concerned about whether cannibalism exists. (B) is out.
Quote:
(C) It is unusual to find as many as eight lobsters caught together in one single trap.
Whether it is unusual or not, does it affect the argument in any ways? No? (C) is out.
Quote:
(D) Members of other marine species sometimes eat their own kind when no other food sources are available.
Other species do not matter here. LOBSTER is the main point. (E)
Quote:
(E) Any food that the eight lobsters in the trap might have obtained was not enough to ward off hunger.
This proves that the lobsters were not brutal. They spared each other's life. Nice play, lobsters! Cheer to the correct answer (E), which is the only remaining choice as well.
_________________
Consistency and Discipline beats Talent.