The answer is C. We can solve this question using the
Logical
approach, by figuring out what the would logically complete this argument.
The first sentence informs us that people tend to have a positive perception of the condition of animals in the wild, and the next sentences describe this perception in detail. Thus, we'd expect the next sentence to either continue this line of thought - describing the positive perception - or contrast it to reality (as implied by the fact that this perceptions is described as "misinformed").
Answer (C) is exactly the first option: (3) They imagine this animal overseeing its offspring proudly and tenderly, the whole family watching the setting of the sun from the limbs of trees with sighs of pleasure.
We can also always go for the
Alternative
approach and use the answers, though this may take us longer:
(1) The type of the wild animal is simple, noble and meaningful.
no good - we know the author disagrees with this perception, as implied by calling it "misinformed"(2) When captured from the wild, and denied of its freedom for too long, the animal becomes a shadow of itself.
again, this fits with the perception (wild good, captive bad) which the author doesn't not support(3) They imagine this animal overseeing its offspring proudly and tenderly, the whole family watching the setting of the sun from the limbs of trees with sighs of pleasure.
Fits exactly with what we already know these people think - wild animals are happy(4) They think that animals in the wild are in practice, free neither in space nor in time, nor in their personal relations.
This is exactly the opposite from what people think!(5) Some people seem to think that animals in the wild lead a life of compulsion and necessity within an unforgiving social hierarchy in an environment where the supply of fear is high and the supply of food low.
This is exactly the opposite from what people think!