Q14

[stephen.dewart]

This one really threw me for a loop. Initially, I did narrow down the answer to between (D) and (E).

However, I chose (D) because I perceived the Galápagos tortoise example to be in keeping with the "species-specific model" discussion -- hence the passage's citing a particular species.

(E) seems decent enough but I took issue with the answer's use of "most" in saying "...is the norm for most species".

Really, I can see both answers being correct, but I know I must be missing something...

[cyruswhittaker]

The question is asking for the purpose of mentioning the Galapagos tortoises. Before this, the author discusses the assumption that underlies traditional theories.

Then, notice that the author says, "Galapagos tortoises, for instance,..." This indicates that the author is presenting the information as a particular example to represent the general behavior that is consistent with the previously discussed theory and assumption.

So it's not the ritua itself that is described as the "norm for most species," but rather the qualities of the behaviour.

D is incorrect for a couple reasons. First, it's unsupported; I wasn't able to see any mention of the behaviour being "unique" to only the tortoises. Second, even if it is factually correct that the behavior is unique, the purpose of including the information isn't simply to provide an example of a unique behaviour; the purpose ties into the paragraph's central idea.

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

I'd second cyruswhittaker's explanation. Great work.

[geverett]

I chose E on my timed PT, but went for B when I did it untimed. How can we infer "most" on answer choice E when the traditional theory only accounts for conflict occurring within a species which in my mind can't be assumed to mean that the traditionalist think is the case for most species. thoughts?

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

I chose E on my timed PT, but went for B when I did it untimed. How can we infer "most" on answer choice E when the traditional theory only accounts for conflict occurring within a species which in my mind can't be assumed to mean that the traditionalist think is the case for most species. thoughts?

Maybe you're slightly misreading answer choice (E). It's not saying that this specific ritual is the case for most species, but that this specific ritual is an example of the species-specific model which says that the conflicts are highly ritualized and that they do not vary from contest to contest.

So while the form of conflict may vary from species to species, the assertion that such conflicts are highly ritualized and do not vary from contest to contest is common to most animals. The tortoises are just one example of this kind of conflict.

Does that answer your question?

[geverett]

I think I see Matt. So it is only citing an example of a kind of behavior that is the norm for most species.

What it is not saying is:

Most species engage in this specific behavior - stretching their neck towards the sky.

Most conflict behavior (whether it is between animals of the same species or animals of different species) is highly ritualized display behavior.

The one thing I am having a hard time with on E, however, is that it seems to assume that most species will get in a conflict which will necessitate this behavior.

Could it not be possible that an equal or great number of species never have conflict within their own ranks which necessitates this behavior?

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Could it not be possible that an equal or great number of species never have conflict within their own ranks which necessitates this behavior?

Is it possible, yes. But that doesn't seem very realistic that most animals species never come into conflict with other animals within their own species.

And remember on RC we typically give the test-writer more freedom with language. The question doesn't ask what, "must be true," but rather, "most likely in order to..."

But I see your point that it doesn't actually specify what percentage of species engage in the species-specific model of animal behavior.

[carly.applebaum]

why is B incorrect?

[austindyoung]

why is B incorrect?

(B) is stating that the author is giving the example of Galapagos turtles in order to suggest that the species-specific model does not occur among all species.

But, is that why the author mentions this example? That would mean she is stating, "Well, this model doesn't occur among all species. So, here is an example of it occurring among a species."

Wait... what?? That makes no sense! This statement by the author here, if anything is meant to strengthen, not weaken the traditional theorists' claims.

This answer choice could be more difficult, if one inserts the core of the rest of the passage--suggesting another model-- into this question.

However, the Galapagos example still is not an attempt to show how the theory is not true in all circumstances. It is showing how the theory actually seems to manifest in circumstances.

(B) is committed in the rest of the passage. Not in the first paragraph.

[anum215]

I understand why E is correct but I'm having a hard time understanding why C is wrong since traditional theories asserts that animal conflict does not vary from contest to contest and Galapagos is an ex. traditional theorists' main claim.

[alex.cheng.2012]

Here's my take on answer (C).

How does one singular example provide evidence that fighting behavior does not vary greatly from contest to contest for most species?

Also, the traditional theory says animal conflict is highly ritualized and does not vary. Can we equate fighting behavior with highly ritualized animal conflict?

That's just my take.

[judaydaday]

I had a lot of trouble with this question for some reason. First time through, I think I spent over a minute trying to decide between (C) and (E). When I had some time left, I came back to this question and lingered between the two answer choices for about another 2 minutes and ended up incorrectly choosing (C).

Here are a couple reasons that I came up with as to why (E) is better than (C):

1. Purpose

For purpose questions, you need to look at the general claim made before or after. In this instance, the Galapagos tortoises is probably referring to the claim made before it.

It is referring to the traditional theorists claim and assumption that animal behaviors are highly ritualized and does not vary from contest to contest and the assumption that they evolved to prevent injury.

2. Evidence v. example

In this passage it would seem that the Galapagos tortoises is more of an example than evidence as indicated by "for instance."

Honestly, I am not sure if this distinction is like splitting hairs here. Can someone correct me if this is wrong?

3. "support the claim that fighting behavior": support v. illustration

1. It doesn't seem to be a support of a claim as much as an illustration of the claim.

2. It doesn't seem to be a claim about the fighting behavior, rather it seems to be more about "ritualized behaviors."

3. Lastly, I believe (E) is better than (C) because of the phrase "traditional theorists assume" rather just saying "support the claim." I'm not sure if I makes that much of a difference, but the question asks for why the AUTHOR mentions the tortoises. Since this is the traditional theorists' claim, "support the claim" seems to be too vague and makes it seem like this is the AUTHOR'S claim, making it incorrect.

If my reasons are wrong for ruling out C and for choosing E, please let me know!!

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

2. Evidence v. example

In this passage it would seem that the Galapagos tortoises is more of an example than evidence as indicated by "for instance."

Honestly, I am not sure if this distinction is like splitting hairs here. Can someone correct me if this is wrong?

This is actually quite important. The author is not here to support the traditional theories of animal behavior and so we wouldn't want to say that the author is providing evidence for the traditional theories.

One big issue with answer choice (C) that I didn't see you mention though is that (C) states that the traditional theories of animal behavior are correct for most species. But the passage does not suggest for how many species the traditional theories of animal behavior better describe animal conflict within that species, nor for how many species Susan Riechert's model is better.

[judaydaday]

2. Evidence v. example

In this passage it would seem that the Galapagos tortoises is more of an example than evidence as indicated by "for instance."

Honestly, I am not sure if this distinction is like splitting hairs here. Can someone correct me if this is wrong?

This is actually quite important. The author is not here to support the traditional theories of animal behavior and so we wouldn't want to say that the author is providing evidence for the traditional theories.

One big issue with answer choice (C) that I didn't see you mention though is that (C) states that the traditional theories of animal behavior are correct for most species. But the passage does not suggest for how many species the traditional theories of animal behavior better describe animal conflict within that species, nor for how many species Susan Riechert's model is better.

Thank you for the explanation! At first I was hesitant on whether or not (E) was better than (C) based on the word "most" since both answer choices seem to say that. I see the difference now. While (C) is suggesting that the passage states that this behavior is attributable to most species, (E) is only suggesting that the traditional theorists' are assuming this - a huge distinction that I missed!

[btwalden]

D - "provide an example of a ritualized fighting behavior OF THE KIND that traditional theorist assume is he norm of most species."

I don't understand how this answer isn't suggesting that most species settle conflict on height, like tortoises....

[amiwoodward]

Can a staff please detail why all the wrong answers are wrong and why E is preferable?
Thank you!

[michellemyxu]

I chose E on my timed PT, but went for B when I did it untimed. How can we infer "most" on answer choice E when the traditional theory only accounts for conflict occurring within a species which in my mind can't be assumed to mean that the traditionalist think is the case for most species. thoughts?

Maybe you're slightly misreading answer choice (E). It's not saying that this specific ritual is the case for most species, but that this specific ritual is an example of the species-specific model which says that the conflicts are highly ritualized and that they do not vary from contest to contest.

So while the form of conflict may vary from species to species, the assertion that such conflicts are highly ritualized and do not vary from contest to contest is common to most animals. The tortoises are just one example of this kind of conflict.

Does that answer your question?

I see what you mean here, but I don't see how the text supports the assertion that traditional theorists assume this ritualized fighting behavior is the norm for most species. The text never talks about to what extent, how much, or, % of species that traditional theorists believe to display this behavior. Am I wrong here?

[ohthatpatrick]

When a sentence DOESN'T quantity, it becomes inherently categorical.

"Animal conflict within a species is highly ritualized and does not vary from contest to contest".

This is what traditional theories assert.

Does it sound like they're saying SOMETIMES animal conflict is ritualized? To me, it sounds definitional, so it sounds like they're saying it always is true.

[StratosM31]

Aye, tough and time consuming question, but I learnt a lot from it (even if I picked the right one under timed conditions). Here are my explanations:

First, I prephrased it. Basically, in the first paragraph, he says:

- Here's what traditional theories say.
- Here's an example of an animal which exemplifies their assertions.

Nothing more, nothing less.

(A) No. The theory implies that this kind of fighting behavior repetitive use of visual and vocal displays etc.) is used by most species, not only a few.
(B) No. He doesn't want to suggest anything yet, the purpose is purely descriptive up to that point, without any evaluation or qualifiers.
(C) No. Again, he doesn't want to support/weaken anything yet, the role is purely descriptive. If anything, the claim is rather weakened in the next paragraphs by providing a counterexample of a species.
(D) No. First, we don't know if it's unique to that species. Even if, that's not the point of the theory, therefore there's no point in providing an example for it.
(E) Yes. That matches exactly the prephrase.

[AshleyT786]

When the author states that "animal conflict...does not vary from contest to contest," is that saying generally, when animals fight, their behavior is consistent and repetitive? Is that why B is incorrect for #14? Because it says some and not most?