It is currently 25 Feb 2018, 19:35

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

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

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

Expert Post
2 KUDOS received
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 7960
Location: Pune, India
Re: For decades we have known that the tuatara, a New Zealand reptile [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 02 Apr 2015, 20:43
2
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
souvik101990 wrote:
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. 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?

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

(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.

(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.

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

(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.


Argument:

- The tuatara has been approaching extinction on the South Island but they were thought to be of the same species as North Island tuatara there was no need to protect them.
- New research indicates that the South Island tuatara are a distinct species, found only in that location.
- To protect the species, human beings are now obliged to prevent their extinction, even if it means killing many of their unendangered natural predators.

What principle governs the naturalist's suggested course of action?

(A) In order to maximize the number of living things on Earth. Steps should be taken to preserve all local populations of animals.
The naturalist is not concerned about "maximizing number of living things" because he is suggesting killing predators (which are living things).

(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.
This is not it. The naturalist is willing to kill other animals so " if doing so would not interfere with the health or well-being of other animals" is not his guiding principle.

(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.
This is correct. Till the species was supposed to survive in North (local extinction in South), there was no problem. But when the naturalist realized that the extinction from South would lead to Global extinction, it imposed an obligation to prevent the extinction.

(D) Human activities that either intentionally or unintentionally threaten the survival of an animal species ought to be curtailed.
This is not mentioned anywhere. Human activity is irrelevant to this argument.

(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.
Not given. It might be true that species found in one region are more vulnerable to extinction but naturalist's actions are not based on the principle that they need to be given "more care and attention" generally. Only because the species is nearing extinction, the naturalist is worried about saving it.

Answer (C)
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Get started with Veritas Prep GMAT On Demand for $199

Veritas Prep Reviews

1 KUDOS received
Retired Moderator
avatar
B
Status: On a mountain of skulls, in the castle of pain, I sit on a throne of blood.
Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Posts: 359
GMAT ToolKit User Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: For decades we have known that the tuatara, a New Zealand reptile [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Apr 2015, 00:02
1
This post received
KUDOS
souvik101990 wrote:
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. 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?

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

(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.

(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.

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

(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.


Time: 1:09

(A) In order to maximize the number of living things on Earth. Steps should be taken to preserve all local populations of animals. - Then why are we open to the idea of killing the predators of Southern Tuatara, which are not close to extinction. Remember we are talking about number of living things and not number of species.

(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. - We are open to the idea of killing the predators of Southern Tuatara. This is not ture.

(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.

- This is true. The Southerm Tuatara's dwindling numbers didnot create an alarm till the time it was identified as a species that was like the Northern Tuatara, which were plenty in numbers - This indicates that there is no obligation to prevent local extinction.

The time it was discovered to be a distinct species from Northern Tuatara, people realised that a unique species is close to extinction - This indicates a threat of global extinction. Hence the people felt obligated to prevent their extinction


(D) Human activities that either intentionally or unintentionally threaten the survival of an animal species ought to be curtailed. - We dont know for sure if human activities were the reason for driving the Southern Tuatara close to extinction. From the stem it seems more likely that it was natural predation by other animals

(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. - The stem proposes the idea of killing even those unendangered natural predators of the Southern Tuatara. This implies that even unique local natural predators of Southern Tuantara who are not endangered will be killed. Incorrect.
Non-Human User
User avatar
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10341
Premium Member
Re: Naturalist: For decades we have known that the tuatara, a [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Feb 2016, 15:17
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
P
Joined: 12 Mar 2013
Posts: 269
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Naturalist: For decades we have known that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Apr 2017, 08:34
Naturalist: For decades we have known that the tuatara, a New Zealand reptile, have 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?

(A) In order to maximize the number of living things on Earth, steps should be taken to preserve all local populations of animals.
(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.
(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.
(D) Human activities that either intentionally or unintentionally threaten the survival of an animal species ought to be curtailed.
(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 Shall Overcome... One day...


Last edited by broall on 16 Jun 2017, 02:29, edited 1 time in total.
Merged post. Please search before posting
Manager
Manager
avatar
G
Joined: 18 Jan 2017
Posts: 85
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Economics
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Naturalist: For decades we have known that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Apr 2017, 09:10
Naturalist: For decades we have known that the tuatara, a New Zealand reptile, have 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. - Implies Local Extinction did not raise any alarm

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.- The threat of global extinction creates an alarm

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

(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, clearly justifies the naturalist line of reasoning
Board of Directors
User avatar
V
Status: Stepping into my 10 years long dream
Joined: 18 Jul 2015
Posts: 3092
Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: Naturalist: For decades we have known that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Apr 2017, 09:21
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.
_________________

How I improved from V21 to V40! ?


How to use this forum in THE BEST way?

Director
Director
User avatar
G
Joined: 26 Aug 2016
Posts: 508
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Strategy
GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V33
GMAT 2: 700 Q50 V33
GPA: 4
WE: Consulting (Consulting)
Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: Naturalist: For decades we have known that [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Apr 2017, 17:33
Imo C.
E is a good trap in my opinion.

Sent from my ONE A2003 using GMAT Club Forum mobile app
Re: Naturalist: For decades we have known that   [#permalink] 30 Apr 2017, 17:33

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 27 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  


cron

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| 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®.