When the same parameters and quantitative theory are used to analyze both termite colonies and troops of rhesus macaques, we will have a unified science of sociobiology. Can this ever really happen? As my own studies have advanced, I have been increasingly impressed with the functional similarities between insect and vertebrate societies and less so with the structural differences that seem, at first glance, to constitute such an immense gulf between them. Consider for a moment termites and macaques. Both form cooperative groups that occupy territories. In both kinds of society there is a well-marked division of labor. Members of both groups communicate to each other hunger, alarm, hostility, caste status or rank, and reproductive status. From the specialistâ€™s point of view, this comparison may at first seem facileâ€”or worse. But it is out of such deliberate oversimplification that the beginnings of a general theory are made.
Which of the following best summarizes the authorâ€™s main point?
(A) Oversimplified comparisons of animal societies could diminish the likelihood of developing a unified science of sociobiology.
(B) Understanding the ways in which animals as different as termites and rhesus macaques resemble each other requires train in both biology and sociology.
(C) Most animals organize themselves into societies that exhibit patterns of group behavior similar to those of human societies.
(D) Animals as different as termites and rhesus macaques follow certain similar and predictable patterns of behavior.
(E) A study of the similarities between insect and vertebrate societies could provide the basis for a unified science of sociobiology.
The path is long, but self-surrender makes it short;
the way is difficult, but perfect trust makes it easy.