Statements:
= comp actions are closer to thinking x non-h animals actions
= n-comp x have vol pw, but some non-h animals do
Let’s look at which option can be inferred from these arguments.
A) Having volitional powers need not involve thinking.
In statement 2 a type of computer (Nut) has volitional powers, which is also present in some non-human animals. But since in statement 1 it’s mentioned that computers actions are close to thinking which is something that non-human animals don’t do, it can be inferred having volitional powers and thinking are two entirely different things and having volitional powers need not involve thinking.
Keep AB) Things that are not animals do not have volitional powers.
The second argument clearly states that some non human animals have volition powers. That means some non animals have volitional powers.
Reject BC) Computers possess none of the attribution of living things.
The above statements doesn’t hint anything about the whole living species. Living things could be humans, animals, plants, algae. Anything. This option is out of scope.
Reject CD) It is necessary to have volitional powers in order to think
We know that non-human animals have volitional powers and computers can perform actions that can’t be performed by non-human animals. It’s be stated that computers perform action of thinking. So, in it not necessary to have volitional powers to think.
Reject DE) Computer will never be able to think as human beings do.
As option C, this statement is also out of the scope of the passage. The passage nowhere hints at talking about human beings.
Reject E