Last visit was: 18 Nov 2025, 23:39 It is currently 18 Nov 2025, 23:39
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
505-555 Level|   Strengthen|                     
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 105,371
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 99,977
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 105,371
Kudos: 778,140
 [98]
13
Kudos
Add Kudos
85
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
DavidTutorexamPAL
User avatar
examPAL Representative
Joined: 07 Dec 2017
Last visit: 09 Sep 2020
Posts: 1,012
Own Kudos:
2,011
 [9]
Given Kudos: 26
Posts: 1,012
Kudos: 2,011
 [9]
7
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
User avatar
Archit3110
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2017
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 8,424
Own Kudos:
4,979
 [2]
Given Kudos: 243
Status:You learn more from failure than from success.
Location: India
Concentration: Sustainability, Marketing
GMAT Focus 1: 545 Q79 V79 DI73
GMAT Focus 2: 645 Q83 V82 DI81
GPA: 4
WE:Marketing (Energy)
GMAT Focus 2: 645 Q83 V82 DI81
Posts: 8,424
Kudos: 4,979
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
sakshamchhabra
Joined: 09 Mar 2018
Last visit: 09 Nov 2020
Posts: 36
Own Kudos:
83
 [3]
Given Kudos: 182
Location: India
Posts: 36
Kudos: 83
 [3]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I was a little thrown off initially after reading some fancy stuff such as extreme longevity, but a lesson to learn was that it made no difference to reach the final answer.


One might expect that within a particular species, any individuals that managed to slow down the aging process would leave more offspring. Natural selection should therefore favor extreme longevity—but this does not seem to be the case. A possible explanation is that aging is a product of the inevitable wear and tear of living, similar to how household appliances generally accumulate faults that lead to their eventual demise. However, most researchers do not find this analogy satisfactory as an explanation.

The question in a way is asking us to strengthen researcher's position and best way to do that is by weakening the potency of the example citied in the question stem.


Option D captures that decently,


D. Organisms are capable of maintenance and self-repair and can remedy much of the damage that they accumulate.

The option nicely differentiates the two entities by avvering that humans are capable of maintenance and self-repair and can handle the damange the accumulate themselves while a machine/appliance cannot . Hence, the explanation presented is amiss.
User avatar
AkshdeepS
Joined: 13 Apr 2013
Last visit: 07 Nov 2025
Posts: 1,436
Own Kudos:
1,884
 [2]
Given Kudos: 1,002
Status:It's near - I can see.
Location: India
Concentration: International Business, Operations
GPA: 3.01
WE:Engineering (Real Estate)
Products:
Posts: 1,436
Kudos: 1,884
 [2]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
One might expect that within a particular species, any individuals that managed to slow down the aging process would leave more offspring. Natural selection should therefore favor extreme longevity—but this does not seem to be the case. A possible explanation is that aging is a product of the inevitable wear and tear of living, similar to how household appliances generally accumulate faults that lead to their eventual demise. However, most researchers do not find this analogy satisfactory as an explanation.

Which of the following would, if true, provide the strongest explanation for the researchers' reaction?

A. Some organisms are capable of living much longer than other organisms.

This fact is not in dispute. Therefore, It is irrelevant to discuss.

B. Some organisms reproduce very quickly despite having short lifespans.

Very quickly does not mean more. Also, the disputing fact is analogy drawn by the author and not the fast reproduction of some organisms.

C. There are several ways of defining “extreme longevity,” and according to some definitions it occurs frequently.

Irrelevant. We are not concerned about definitions.

D. Organisms are capable of maintenance and self-repair and can remedy much of the damage that they accumulate.

Correct : Author draws a conclusion between household items life span and wear & tear and the living beings. This choice shows that we can't compare the two.

E. Some organisms generate much more wear and tear on their bodies than others.

Such comparison is not required as researchers are not disputing this fact.
User avatar
MikeScarn
User avatar
Current Student
Joined: 04 Sep 2017
Last visit: 01 Jun 2025
Posts: 275
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 227
Location: United States (IL)
Concentration: Technology, Leadership
GMAT 1: 690 Q44 V41
GMAT 2: 730 Q50 V38
GPA: 3.62
WE:Sales (Computer Software)
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
One might expect that within a particular species, any individuals that managed to slow down the aging process would leave more offspring. Natural selection should therefore favor extreme longevity—but this does not seem to be the case. A possible explanation is that aging is a product of the inevitable wear and tear of living, similar to how household appliances generally accumulate faults that lead to their eventual demise. However, most researchers do not find this analogy satisfactory as an explanation.

Which of the following would, if true, provide the strongest explanation for the researchers' reaction?

Which answer choice breaks the analogy of living organisms to household appliances? Which answer choice shows the difference between aging organisms and aging household appliances?

Bunuel
A. Some organisms are capable of living much longer than other organisms.
Doesn't relate to the question.

Bunuel
B. Some organisms reproduce very quickly despite having short lifespans.
Doesn't relate to the question.

Bunuel
C. There are several ways of defining “extreme longevity,” and according to some definitions it occurs frequently.
Doesn't relate to the question. Irrelevant.

Bunuel
D. Organisms are capable of maintenance and self-repair and can remedy much of the damage that they accumulate.
Great. Organisms can heal themselves, but household appliances can't.

Bunuel
E. Some organisms generate much more wear and tear on their bodies than others.
Doesn't relate to the question.
User avatar
RAHUL_GMAT
Joined: 24 Oct 2017
Last visit: 31 Jul 2023
Posts: 37
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 286
Posts: 37
Kudos: 20
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hey i could reach to the answer stem easily but i couldnt understand why do we have this statement in the premise.

"any individuals that managed to slow down the aging process would leave more offspring"


it doesnt even set up the context of the question
avatar
jaisonsunny77
Joined: 05 Jan 2019
Last visit: 25 Aug 2021
Posts: 459
Own Kudos:
381
 [1]
Given Kudos: 28
Posts: 459
Kudos: 381
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Type: explain the researchers reaction

Reaction: Researchers do not see ''analogy'' drawn as a satisfactory explanation of ''ageing''

Analogy: aging is a product of the inevitable wear and tear of living, similar to how household appliances generally accumulate faults that lead to their eventual demise.


A. Some organisms are capable of living much longer than other organisms.
- not relevant to the ''analogy''
B. Some organisms reproduce very quickly despite having short lifespans. - ''rate of reproduction'' is not relevant to the ''analogy'' cited.
C. There are several ways of defining “extreme longevity,” and according to some definitions it occurs frequently.
- ''definitions'' of longevity is irrelevant to the ''analogy''
D. Organisms are capable of maintenance and self-repair and can remedy much of the damage that they accumulate. - if organisms are capable of maintenance and self-repair and can remedy much of the damage that they accumulate, then they make themselves strikingly different from the ''analogy'' cited in the passage. (D) supports the researches' reaction. Hence, (D) is the right answer choice.

E. Some organisms generate much more wear and tear on their bodies than others.
- 'depth' or ''different levels'' of damage is not relevant to the ''analogy''cited.
User avatar
Fighter1095
Joined: 20 Mar 2017
Last visit: 08 May 2024
Posts: 132
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 225
Location: India
GRE 1: Q167 V162
GPA: 3.5
Products:
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
One might expect that within a particular species, any individuals that managed to slow down the aging process would leave more offspring. Natural selection should therefore favor extreme longevity—but this does not seem to be the case. A possible explanation is that aging is a product of the inevitable wear and tear of living, similar to how household appliances generally accumulate faults that lead to their eventual demise. However, most researchers do not find this analogy satisfactory as an explanation.

Which of the following would, if true, provide the strongest explanation for the researchers' reaction?

There is a comparison between human longevity vs household appliance longevity


Only contenders are - B & D

B - Some organisms reproduce very quickly despite having short lifespans. - Very quickly doesn't mean more.The contradicting factor is analogy not the reproduction rate

D - Organisms are capable of maintenance and self-repair and can remedy much of the damage that they accumulate. - This talks about the analogy and the wear and tear
User avatar
emcheeks
Joined: 28 Jun 2020
Last visit: 22 Dec 2024
Posts: 119
Own Kudos:
111
 [1]
Given Kudos: 78
Posts: 119
Kudos: 111
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
We are explaining why this analogy doesn't work in researcher's opinions, NOT proving why "this does not seem to be the case" that "natural selection should favor extreme longevity"

With that in mind (prove analogy don't work): D, organisms can repair themselves, and house appliances cannot --> they are not even comparable!! Therefore, analogy won't work.

If we were to prove that "natural selection should favor extreme longevity", then B might work (not 100% sure) because B proves this point by presenting a counterexample --> some organisms with short life can reproduce quickly --> it's not necessarily true that natural selection only prefers long life.
avatar
mba757
avatar
Current Student
Joined: 15 Jun 2020
Last visit: 04 Aug 2022
Posts: 305
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 245
Location: United States
GPA: 3.3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Conclusion: “most researchers do not find this analogy satisfactory as an explanation”
Prethink: What is the disconnect here? During the read, it sounded off. Why? The stimulus is comparing life’s aging to that of a household appliance. There are a lot more factors with aging in life. Maybe the answer could be associated with another factor that isn’t highlighted within the stimulus.
Which of the following would, if true, provide the strongest explanation for the researchers' reaction?

A. Some organisms are capable of living much longer than other organisms.
One sided/irrelevant – we don’t care about a comparison between some organisms with other organisms. We want to know the applicability of organism’s lives to appliance’s lives.

B. Some organisms reproduce very quickly despite having short lifespans.
Out of scope – Regardless if some organisms do or don’t, this doesn’t impact the conclusion (that the analogy is not satisfactory as an explanation – for aging = product of inevitable wear and tear of living, similar to household appliances). This doesn’t directly affect the conclusion at hand, you need to make logical leaps for this to be even remotely true. Moreover, what does “very quickly” even mean?

C. There are several ways of defining “extreme longevity,” and according to some definitions it occurs frequently.
Out of scope – This isn’t a relevant portion of the stimulus. It isn’t directly relevant to the conclusion.

D. Organisms are capable of maintenance and self-repair and can remedy much of the damage that they accumulate.
This is a third element. The analogy between the aging of living organisms and household appliances isn’t the best because there are other factors at play. Living organisms have all these tings that they are capable of while household appliances clearly do not.

E. Some organisms generate much more wear and tear on their bodies than others.
One sided/irrelevant – we don’t care about a comparison between some organisms with other organisms. We want to know the applicability of organism’s lives to appliance’s lives.
User avatar
egmat
User avatar
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,108
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 700
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 5,108
Kudos: 32,884
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
RAHUL_GMAT
Hey i could reach to the answer stem easily but i couldnt understand why do we have this statement in the premise.

"any individuals that managed to slow down the aging process would leave more offspring"


it doesnt even set up the context of the question



Hey Rahul,


The first statement "One might expect that within a particular species, any individuals that managed to slow down the aging process would leave more offspring." does set up the context of the argument.


Think about it, the second line - Natural selection should therefore favor extreme longevity—but this does not seem to be the case.

The first statement provides the premise for the BOLD part. Otherwise, why would the author say that "Natural selection should therefore favor extreme longevity", there must be some reason why the author gives us this information.


Thank you
User avatar
CEdward
Joined: 11 Aug 2020
Last visit: 14 Apr 2022
Posts: 1,203
Own Kudos:
272
 [1]
Given Kudos: 332
Posts: 1,203
Kudos: 272
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
One might expect that within a particular species, any individuals that managed to slow down the aging process would leave more offspring. Natural selection should therefore favor extreme longevity—but this does not seem to be the case. A possible explanation is that aging is a product of the inevitable wear and tear of living, similar to how household appliances generally accumulate faults that lead to their eventual demise. However, most researchers do not find this analogy satisfactory as an explanation.

-Natural selection should favour longevity (since individuals who live longer leave more offspring)
-Natural selection does not seem to favour longevity
-Explanation for phenomenon is that aging is a product of wear and tear, similar to how appliances accumulate faults leading to their end of life
-Most researchers do not like the analogy

A strengthener here would be something that points out why the analogy is inappropriate…perhaps because appliances are missing some feature of the aging process or that they are different in some fundamental way. After all, you’re comparing technology with living organisms.

Which of the following would, if true, provide the strongest explanation for the researchers' reaction?

A. Some organisms are capable of living much longer than other organisms.
-irrelevant
B. Some organisms reproduce very quickly despite having short lifespans.
-explains why natural selection does not necessarily favour longer lifespans…after all the job of ensuring species propagation can be done with less resources (i.e. living shorter lives)
C. There are several ways of defining “extreme longevity,” and according to some definitions it occurs frequently.
-this choice seems to question the truth of one of the premises…OUT
D. Organisms are capable of maintenance and self-repair and can remedy much of the damage that they accumulate.
-Correct; organisms are…well…living…this choice tells us what some of those features are that distinguish organisms from appliances which by all accounts don’t self-repair and maintain (getting fixed is besides the point…that’s not an example of self-regulation)…simply this choice justifies the researchers reaction that the comparison is inappropriate
E. Some organisms generate much more wear and tear on their bodies than others.
-plausible, but besides the point
User avatar
mSKR
Joined: 14 Aug 2019
Last visit: 10 Mar 2024
Posts: 1,290
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 381
Location: Hong Kong
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
GPA: 3.81
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
Posts: 1,290
Kudos: 938
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
RAHUL_GMAT
Hey i could reach to the answer stem easily but i couldnt understand why do we have this statement in the premise.

"any individuals that managed to slow down the aging process would leave more offspring"


it doesnt even set up the context of the question


One might expect that within a particular species, any individuals that managed to slow down the aging process would leave more offspring.
any individuals that can grow slowly shall be able to produce more children in its life time

Natural selection should therefore favor extreme longevity—but this does not seem to be the case.
Natural selection is the process through which populations of living organisms adapt and change
So Natural selection seems to the best way for longevity .
why?

A possible explanation is that aging is a product of the inevitable wear and tear of living, similar to how household appliances generally accumulate faults that lead to their eventual demise.
Reference to aging on products such as household appliances

However, most researchers do not find this analogy satisfactory as an explanation.
why the comparison is not right?

In summary, why the natural process for species and products can not be compared?

OptionD gives the correct distinction as compared to other options.

I hope it helps.
User avatar
Sneha2021
Joined: 20 Dec 2020
Last visit: 10 Jun 2025
Posts: 315
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 522
Location: India
Posts: 315
Kudos: 38
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
KarishmaB
I couldn't understand how first 2 lines are related. Please help.

"One might expect that within a particular species, any individuals that managed to slow down the aging process would leave more offspring.
Natural selection should therefore favor extreme longevity—but this does not seem to be the case.

My Understanding - Organisms that are more adapted to their environment are more likely to survive and that's why this concept supports longer life. How this is related to 1st line."

Thanks!
User avatar
ArnauG
Joined: 23 Dec 2022
Last visit: 14 Oct 2023
Posts: 298
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 199
Posts: 298
Kudos: 42
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The researchers' dissatisfaction with the analogy between aging and the wear and tear of household appliances suggests that they find it inadequate in explaining the phenomenon of aging. To provide the strongest explanation for their reaction, we need to identify a statement that supports their skepticism.

Among the options provided, (D) "Organisms are capable of maintenance and self-repair and can remedy much of the damage that they accumulate" would provide the strongest explanation. If organisms have mechanisms for maintenance and self-repair that can counteract the damage accumulated over time, it challenges the notion that aging is solely a result of wear and tear. This suggests that there may be other factors contributing to the aging process that the analogy fails to capture.
User avatar
VerbalBot
User avatar
Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Last visit: 04 Jan 2021
Posts: 18,834
Own Kudos:
Posts: 18,834
Kudos: 986
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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.
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7445 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
188 posts