Self-study
Ecologist: Support Forest fires, the vast majority of which are started by lightning, are not only a natural phenomenon to which all forest ecosystems are well adapted, but are required for many forests to flourish. ██████ █████ ██████████ ███ ███████ ███ █████████ ██ ████ █████ ███████ ██ █████████████ ██ ████████ ███ ███████ ███ █████████ ██ ███████ ██ ██████████ ███████ █████████ ██ ██████████ █████ ████ ██████████ █████ ████████ ██ ████ ██ █████ ██████████ ████████ ██ █████ ██████ ██ ███████ ██ ███████ ██████ █████ ███ ███████████ ███ █████████████ ██████ █████ ██████ ██ ████ █████ ███ ███████ ██ ████ ██████████ ███ ██████████
Summary
The author concludes that humans should not try to prevent or control forest fires; rather, forest fires should be left alone and allowed to burn out naturally. This is based on the fact that forest fires are required for many forests to flourish.
Missing Connection
The conclusion tells us that we shouldn’t try to prevent or control forest fires. But the premise doesn’t tell us anything about when we “should not” do something. All we know from the premise is that many forests need forest fires in order for their ecosystems to flourish. The correct answer needs to connect this premise to something prescriptive. For example, “If forest fires are required by many forests to flourish, then humans should not try to prevent or control forest fires.”
17.
The conclusion drawn above follows █████████ ██ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ ██ ████████
a
Human intervention in ███████ █████████ █████ ██ ██████ ███ ██████████ █████████ ██ ███████████
(A) doesn’t tell me why we “should not” do something. Sure, maybe human intervention reduces biological diversity...but is that something we should care about? We don’t know.
b
Protection of forests ███ █████ ██████████ ██ ███ ████ ██████████ ██████ ███ ██████████ ██ ███████ ██ ███████ ██████ ██████
(B) isolates protection of forests and their ecosystems as the only “legitimate” reason for trying to prevent or control forest fires. In other words, no other consideration should matter when deciding whether to prevent/control forest fires. And, since we know from the premise that forest fires are good for the protection of forests, (B) implies that we should not prevent/control fires.
c
Forest fires begun ██ ████████ ███████ ██████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ █████ ████ ███████ ████████
We’re trying to conclude that we shouldn’t systematically prevent/control forest fires. (C) goes in the opposite direction.
d
Humans tend to ████ ███████ ██ ████ ██ █████ ██████████ ██ ███████████ ███ ███ ████████████ ██ █████ ██████
(D) doesn’t establish that we shouldn’t try to prevent/control fires. How humans perceive forests doesn’t prove anything about what humans should not do.
e
If the health ██ ██ █████████ ██ ██████████ ██ ███████ ██ █████ ██████████ █████ ██████ ██████ ███ █████████ ██ █████ ████ ███████
(E) concerns threats to an ecosystem by insects or other predators. But we have no reason to think this is related to threats posed by forest fires. What humans should do in response to threats by insects or other predators does not prove what they should do in response to forest fires.