Self-study
Some biologists believe that the capacity for flight first developed in marine reptiles, claiming that feathers are clearly developed from scales. █████ ██████████ ███████ ██████ ████ ███████████ ████████ ███ ████ ████ ████ ██ ██████ ███ ████ █████████ ████████ ████ ████ ███████ █████ ███ ███████ ████ ██████ █████ █████████ ██ █████████████ ████████ ██████ ███ █████ ████ ███ █████ ██ █████████████ ████████ █████ ████ █████████ ████ ██████ ████ ██████ ████ ██ ██ ████ ██████ ████ █████████████ ████████ █████████ █████ ██ ██████ █████ █████ ████ ██████ ██ ███████
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author’s conclusion rejects the view of biologists who believe that the capacity for flight first developed in marine reptiles. Those biologists, with whom the author disagrees, support their claim with the theory that feathers developed from scales. To support his rejection of these biologists, the author uses the example of bats, which fly and have no scales, and non-marine reptiles that have scales. These examples cast doubt on the view that marine reptiles first developed the capacity for flight.
In the last two sentences of the stimulus, the author actually introduces a completely new argument! The discussion in the last two sentences is not relevant for our understanding of the author’s perspective.
Identify Argument Part
The claim in the question stem supports the author’s rejection of the view that flight first developed in marine reptiles.
12.
Which one of the following ████ ██████████ █████████ ███ ████ ██████ ██ ███ ███████ ██ ███ █████ ████ █████████ ████████ ████ ███████
a
It is cited ██ ████████ ███████ ███ █████ ████ ███ ████████ ███ ██████ █████ █████████ ██ ██████ █████████
The claim in the question stem is a premise that supports the author’s conclusion, which is that it is not true that the capacity for flight first developed in marine reptiles. (A) encapsulates this.
b
It is cited ██ ████████ ███████ ███ █████ ████ ███ ████████ ███ ██████ █████ █████████ ██ █████████████ ████████
The second (irrelevant) argument makes a claim that it is less likely that land-dwelling reptiles’ limbs developed into wings. (B) includes an imprecise reference to this second argument; the claim in the question stem has no relationship with this second argument.
c
It is cited ██ ████████ ███████ ███ █████ ████ ███ ████████ ███ ██████ █████ █████████ ██ █████████████ █████████
The claim in the question stem does has no relationship to the claim that flight first developed in tree-dwelling animals; instead, the claim in the question stem is used to reject the claim about flight and marine animals.
d
It weakens the █████ ████ █████████████ ████████ ████ ███ █████ ████ ██ ███████ ██ ███████ ███ ████████ ███ ███████
The claim in the question stem has no relationship to the claim that flight first developed in tree-dwelling animals; instead, the claim in the question stem is used to reject the claim about flight and marine animals.
e
It corroborates the ███████████ ████ ████ ███████ ███████ ███████ ████ ██ █████ █████████ ███ ████████ ██ ████
The claim in the question stem works together with the observation that some mammals without scales can fly; these two claims don’t support each other, but they work together to support the main conclusion.