GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 19 Sep 2018, 20:08

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

For decades we have known that the tuatara, a New Zealand reptile

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Board of Directors
User avatar
V
Status: Stepping into my 10 years long dream
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Posts: 3676
Premium Member Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: Naturalist: For decades we have known that  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Apr 2017, 10:21
The argument is saying when we South species matches with those of North, there is no need of protecting south ones as we already have the same species in the north.

But then a new study comes and says No, Stop they are distinct. After this study, some obligations to prevent them started.

It means when we thought it is a local impact, we didn't do anything. But when we came to know that it is a global impact, we got alert.

This is what option C is doing.

(A) In order to maximize the number of living things on Earth, steps should be taken to preserve all local populations of animals. : OFS. All local is not relevant. Not matching with what we need.

(B) When an animal is in danger of dying, there is an obligation to help save its life, if doing so would not interfere with the health or well-being of other animals or people. : But we are interfering with the health of other species as per the argument, Hence, this option is incorrect.

(C) The threat of local extinction imposes no obligation to try to prevent that extinction, whereas the threat of global extinction does impose such an obligation. Correct for the reasons mentioned above.

(D) Human activities that either intentionally or unintentionally threaten the survival of an animal species ought to be curtailed. : ok, I will do so. But how does it relate to what we want?.

(E) Species that are found in only one circumscribed geographical region ought to be given more care and attention than are other species because they are more vulnerable to extinction. We are talking about endangered species only. Not all. so, extreme and Out.
_________________

My GMAT Story: From V21 to V40
My MBA Journey: My 10 years long MBA Dream
My Secret Hacks: Best way to use GMATClub | Importance of an Error Log!
Verbal Resources: All SC Resources at one place | All CR Resources at one place
Blog: Subscribe to Question of the Day Blog

GMAT Club Inbuilt Error Log Functionality - View More.
New Visa Forum - Ask all your Visa Related Questions - here.

New! Best Reply Functionality on GMAT Club!



Find a bug in the new email templates and get rewarded with 2 weeks of GMATClub Tests for free

Director
Director
User avatar
P
Joined: 26 Aug 2016
Posts: 666
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V33
GMAT 2: 700 Q50 V33
GMAT 3: 730 Q51 V38
GPA: 4
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: Naturalist: For decades we have known that  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Apr 2017, 18:33
Imo C.
E is a good trap in my opinion.

Sent from my ONE A2003 using GMAT Club Forum mobile app
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 08 Dec 2016
Posts: 22
GMAT 1: 610 Q49 V25
GMAT 2: 610 Q46 V28
GMAT 3: 750 Q50 V40
GPA: 3.4
CAT Tests
Re: For decades we have known that the tuatara, a New Zealand reptile  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 23 Jun 2018, 23:35
Naturalist: For decades we have known that the tuatara, a New Zealand reptile, has been approaching extinction on the South Island. But since South Island tuatara were thought to be of the same species as North Island tuatara there was no need to protect them. But new research indicates that the South Island tuatara are a distinct species, found only in that location. Because it is now known that if the South Island tuatara are lost an entire species will thereby be lost, human beings are now obliged to prevent their extinction, even if it means killing many of their unendangered natural predators.

Which one of the following principles most helps to justify the naturalists’ argumentation?

Premises: Earlier Tuatara, NZ = Tautara NI. Hence no protection. But as per new research South Island tuatara are a distinct species, hence human beings are required to save the species even if it means killing many of their unendangered natural predators.

Prethinking: Saving endangered species is more IMP that saving unendangered natural predators/species.


(A) In order to maximize the number of living things on Earth, steps should be taken to preserve all local populations of animals. NOPE

(B) When an animal is in danger of dying, there is an obligation to help save its life, if doing so would not interfere with the health or well-being of other animals or people. People???? Nope

(C) The threat of local extinction imposes no obligation to try to prevent that extinction, whereas the threat of global extinction does impose such an obligation. Yes. It can be said. Bcz, when it was thought Earlier Tuatara, NZ = Tautara NI. Hence no protection. but after new evidence, view point changed suddenly and human beings are required to save the species

(D) Human activities that either intentionally or unintentionally threaten the survival of an animal species ought to be curtailed. Irrelevant

(E) Species that are found in only one circumscribed geographical region ought to be given more care and attention than are other species because they are more vulnerable to extinction. Irrelevant. Argument is about engendered spices and not about Species that are found in only one circumscribed geographical region.
Re: For decades we have known that the tuatara, a New Zealand reptile &nbs [#permalink] 23 Jun 2018, 23:35

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 23 posts ] 

Display posts from previous: Sort by

For decades we have known that the tuatara, a New Zealand reptile

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Events & Promotions

PREV
NEXT


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.