The official explanation for Question #3:
Quote:
3. According to the passage, which of the following is most probably NOT true of a zoophyte?Explanation:
The passage states that animals possess two attributes—life and locomotion.
It further states that a sponge or a zoophyte possesses only one of these attributes.
Then, this attribute must be life because it would be
a little absurd to assume that zoophytes are capable of movement but do not possess life.
Hence,
(B) is the correct answer. Fair enough, from a logical standpoint.But we are looking for premises or information
from the passage that will support the correct answer.
Although the OE gives textual support for the correct answer,
I am not convinced that the OE gives textual support for eliminating the other answers.
In Verbal, our job is to eliminate four incorrect answers, not to find one correct answer.
I have approached the text of the passage differently.
The layperson rejects "zoophyte = animal" and insists that "zoophyte = plant"
because for him, while both animals and plants possess life, animals move. Plants do not move.
From the lines below we can draw the inference*
that yields the answer for this amended Question #3—
According to the passage, which of the following is most probably true of a zoophyte?[he will encounter] a sponge or a zoophyte,
which possesses only one of his supposed attributes of animal life,
but which he is assured is nevertheless a member of the animal kingdom.
Such an encounter usually perplexes the neophyte at first, but . . .
he will tenaciously contend that the sponge must be a plant,
until the evidence produced is so strong that he is compelled to desert his position
[that the zoophyte is a plant]. . .WHY does he insist that a zoophyte is a plant?
He observes the zoophyte. He may be wrong about the classification, but he can see.
According to his definition, a plant possesses life but not locomotion.
If he insists that the zoophyte is a plant, then the zoophyte must fit his definition of plant:
the zoophyte
is alive but does not move.
He rejects the classification of the zoophyte as an animal, because for him,
an animal is something that is alive and that moves.
The zoophyte that he observes must be alive but not able to move (fits his definition of plant).
And for him, the zoophyte is not an animal because if it were an animal, it would move.
3. According to the passage, which of the following is most probably true of a zoophyte?A) It is capable of movement.No. He insists that the zoophyte is a plant. For him, plants do not move.
He has observed the zoophyte. He is wrong about the classification, but his eyes can see.
If it were capable of movement, he would immediately accept the classification of zoophyte as "animal." He does not do so.
B) is a living beingYes.
He insists that the zoophyte is a plant, which he understands to mean:
a
living being that does not move.
He is told that the zoophyte is an animal, which he understands to mean:
a
living being that does move.
He must be insisting that the zoophyte is a plant
because although alive, the zoophyte does not move. The zoophyte is alive.
C) It is capable of movement and is also a living being.No. If the zoophyte were both moving and alive, he would happily accept its
classification as an animal (for him, animal = alive and moving).
The zoophyte is
not both alive and moving.
(D) It does not contain chlorophyll as plants doNo. Laughably off-topic. Chlorophyll is never mentioned.
(E) It is not an animalNo. The layperson is told that the zoophyte is an animal.
Evidence supports that fact, to the point that the layperson gets frustrated.
The zoophyte
IS an animal.
If Question 3 is amended, the correct answer is B.*Finding premises in the passage
From the passage, what do we know about zoophytes?
We have step-by-step information from which we can draw inferences to answer Question #3.
• The layperson believes that an animal both possesses life and has locomotion (movement).
• The layperson believes that a plan possesses life but not locomotion (movement)
• The layperson is confused when he encounters a sponge, which is a type of zoophyte.
• He is confused because he is told that a zoophyte is an animal.
• He refuses to believe that the zoophyte is an animal.
• He insists that the zoophyte is a plant [NOT an animal]. Why?
-- For him, the definition of a plant is something that possesses life but does not move (does not possess locomotion).
INFERENCE: he insists that the zoophyte is a plant because the zoophyte fits his definition of a plant.
More specifically, we can infer that the zoophyte is alive but the zoophyte does not move.
Stated differently: This zoophyte thing that he observes? He insists that it is a plant, which he believes possesses life but does not move.
Because he defines the zoophyte as a plant,
we can infer: he can see that the zoophyte possesses life but does not possess locomotion.
Those qualities are what he sees, regardless of whether he is correct about the category.
The correct inference (what is "most true" about the zoophyte) that can be drawn from the text comes from this info in the passage.