GetThisDone wrote:
Scientist: Evolutionary biology has long held that the most attractive males of a species, defined as those with the highest quality physical traits that have no Darwinian survival value, will draw the most female mates.
The resulting male offspring will inherit that attractiveness and themselves have more children as a result, thus ensuring widespread dissemination of the grandparents’ genes. Recently, however, scientists have found that the sons of “high quality” male flycatchers failed to inherit the father’s mating status. Further, the most attractive males were so busy mating that they neglected their offspring;
as a result, the sons of homelier birds, who took better care of their offspring, had more success at propagating the species.
The two portions in boldface play which of the following roles in the scientist’s argument?
(A) The first is the conclusion of a theory disputed by the scientist; the second is the scientist’s new contention based upon the latest evidence.
(B) The first is a premise of a long-held biological theory; the second is an example of how this theory works.
(C) The first is an explanation of how a biological theory is thought to work; the second is an example of research results that do not support this theory.
(D) The first is an example of a theory that used to be prevalent; the second is the new theory that is now considered predominant by scientists.
(E) The first introduces a long-held theory that the scientist is going to disprove; the second is the scientist’s new theory to replace the one she disproved.
Main CR Qs link -
https://gmatclub.com/forum/cr-qs-600-700 ... 31508.htmlOFFICIAL EXPLANATION
This is a Role question. The first two sentences of the argument address the currently-held theory that certain physical features that serve only to indicate attractiveness have developed in order to help those males distribute their own genes more widely. For example, a male peacock's plume of tailfeathers does not actively help him to survive; the theory holds that it helps him to procreate by attracting females. The first boldface portion explains to us how this theory works.
The final two sentences of the argument introduce information that contradicts this theory. In this particular species of bird, the homelier birds are better at passing on their genes than the attractive birds. The second boldface portion provides an example of the specific research results that contradict the theory.
(A) The first bold statement is not a conclusion; it is an explanation of how the theory works. The second bold statement is not a contention (or conclusion); it simply presents new evidence and allows the reader to draw a conclusion.
(B) The two bold statements address opposite sides of the argument, but this choice says that the second statement supports the theory advanced by the first statement.
(C) CORRECT. The first bold statement explains how the theory is thought to work and the second bold statement presents research results that contradict this theory.
(D) Nothing in the argument indicates that the long-held theory discussed in the first two sentences is not still prevalent. Indeed, the research that contradicts the theory was only discovered recently. In addition, the second bold statement does not introduce a new theory; it simply presents research results that contradict the original theory.
(E) The scientist does not completely disprove the long-held theory; she merely presents one piece of data that does not support the theory. In addition, the second bold statement does not introduce a new theory; it simply presents research results that contradict the original theory
close
Updated on: 27 Aug 2017, 00:57
36%
(02:42)
wrong 
