Meerkat "sentinels," so-called because they watch for predators while

Question

Meerkat "sentinels," so-called because they watch for predators while other meerkat group members forage, almost never fall victim to those predators, yet the foragers often do. This advantage accruing to the sentinel does not mean that its watchful behavior is entirely self-interested. On the contrary, the sentinel's behavior is an example of animal behavior motivated at least in part by altruism. The loud bark emitted by the sentinel as it dashes for the cover of the nearest hole alerts other group members to the presence of danger.

Which one of the following is a questionable reasoning technique employed in the argument?

(A) appealing to evidence that tends to undermine rather than support the argument's conclusion

(B) appealing to evidence that presupposes the truth of the argument's conclusion

(C) inferring solely from an effect produced by an action that a purpose of the action is to produce that effect

(D) inferring solely from the claim that the behavior of a meerkat sentinel is not entirely selfish that this behavior is entirely altruistic

(E) concluding that a claim is false on the grounds that insufficient evidence has been offered to support it

NHUANH · Answer

C is a clear take here. We cannot conclude the purpose of an action on the basis of its effect. The meerket may shout because it is fear

Posted from my mobile device

sonalgmat123 · Answer

Which one of the following is a questionable reasoning technique employed in the argument?

It seems A as the its not selfless behaviour to look for cover to evade danger

(A) appealing to evidence that tends to undermine rather than support the argument's conclusion

(B) appealing to evidence that presupposes the truth of the argument's conclusion

(C) inferring solely from an effect produced by an action that a purpose of the action is to produce that effect

(D) inferring solely from the claim that the behavior of a meerkat sentinel is not entirely selfish that this behavior is entirely altruistic

(E) concluding that a claim is false on the grounds that insufficient evidence has been offered to support it

LipiSinha · Answer

Premise 1:  Meerkat "sentinels," so-called because they watch for predators while other meerkat group members forage, almost never fall victim to those predators, yet the foragers often do.

Premise 2:  This advantage accruing to the sentinel does not mean that its watchful behavior is entirely self-interested.

Conclusion:  the sentinel's behavior is an example of animal behavior motivated at least in part by altruism.

Evidence:  The loud bark emitted by the sentinel as it dashes for the cover of the nearest hole alerts other group 
members to the presence of danger.

(A) appealing to evidence that tends to undermine rather than support the argument's conclusion

The evidence does not undermine the argument's conclusion. Instead it supports it. This can be eliminated.

(B) appealing to evidence that presupposes the truth of the argument's conclusion

The evidence in no way presupposes the truth of the conclusion

(C) inferring solely from an effect produced by an action that a purpose of the action is to produce that effect

It is true that the loud bark emitted by the sentinel as it dashes for the cover of the nearest hole alerts other group members to the presence of danger. But this cannot be a proof as to the sentinel's altruistic behaviour. Assuming that the meerkat sentinel barks in order to alert the foragers to the presence of danger is the questionable reasoning technique applied in the argument. It can bark for other reasons also, for eg: it might be just scared (as also stated by NHUANH).

D) inferring solely from the claim that the behavior of a meerkat sentinel is not entirely selfish that this behavior is entirely altruistic

This is out of scope.

(E) concluding that a claim is false on the grounds that insufficient evidence has been offered to support it

The argument does not conclude that the claim is false.

CEdward · Answer

It's C. This is a classic case of spinning the evidence to make it consistent with the conclusion even though such evidence doesn't necessarily follow logically.

Meerkat "sentinels," so-called because they watch for predators while other meerkat group members forage, almost never fall victim to those predators, yet the foragers often do. This advantage accruing to the sentinel does not mean that its watchful behavior is entirely self-interested. On the contrary, the sentinel's behavior is an example of animal behavior motivated at least in part by altruism. The loud bark emitted by the sentinel as it dashes for the cover of the nearest hole alerts other group members to the presence of danger.

Which one of the following is a questionable reasoning technique employed in the argument?

(A) appealing to evidence that tends to undermine rather than support the argument's conclusion

(B) appealing to evidence that presupposes the truth of the argument's conclusion

(C) inferring solely from an effect produced by an action that a purpose of the action is to produce that effect  CORRECT

(D) inferring solely from the claim that the behavior of a meerkat sentinel is not entirely selfish that this behavior is entirely altruistic

(E) concluding that a claim is false on the grounds that insufficient evidence has been offered to support it

bidskamikaze · Answer

The competition is among A, B, and C.

(A) appealing to evidence that tends to undermine rather than support the argument's conclusion
-  Close, but Incorrect. It may seem that the premise is actually weakening the argument. However, that is not the case.

(B) appealing to evidence that presupposes the truth of the argument's conclusion
-  No. This is not a circular argument in any way.

(C) inferring solely from an effect produced by an action that a purpose of the action is to produce that effect
-  Correct. Ask the question: what if the sentinels have NO INTEREST in alerting other? It's just that they are scared to death and scream in fear and run. This would weaken the claim made by the Author.

Correct: C

gmatbd · Answer

Which clause is the conclusion here?

This one: This advantage accruing to the sentinel does not mean that its watchful behavior is entirely self-interested.

or this one: the sentinel's behavior is an example of animal behavior motivated at least in part by altruism.

Please explain.

unraveled · Answer

Blue text is the conclusion. The other counter offered is authors reasoning that is questionable.

Meerkat "sentinels," so-called because they watch for predators while other meerkat group members forage, almost never fall victim to those predators, yet the foragers often do.  This advantage accruing to the sentinel does not mean that its watchful behavior is entirely self-interested . On the contrary, the sentinel's behavior is an example of animal behavior motivated at least in part by altruism. The loud bark emitted by the sentinel as it dashes for the cover of the nearest hole alerts other group members to the presence of danger.

Which one of the following is a questionable reasoning technique employed in the argument?

(A) appealing to evidence that tends to  undermine rather than support  the argument's conclusion - WRONG.

(B) appealing to evidence that  presupposes the truth of the argument's conclusion  - WRONG.

(C) inferring solely from an effect produced by an action that a purpose of the action is to produce that effect - CORRECT. Round trips the cause and effect.

(D) inferring solely from the claim that the  behavior  of a meerkat sentinel is  not entirely selfish  that this behavior is  entirely altruistic  - WRONG. Goes extreme in its claim that ruins the choice.

(E) concluding that a claim is false on the grounds that  insufficient evidence has been offered  to support it - WRONG. Nowhere it says or suggests that.

Answer C.

Meerkat "sentinels," so-called because they watch for predators while

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Meerkat "sentinels," so-called because they watch for predators while

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards