PrepTest 117, Section 3, Question 2
Leatherbacks, the largest of the sea turtles, when(61 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(9 more words not shown)
- AFewer diseases attack(7 more words not shown)
- BThe average life(16 more words not shown)
- CMost leatherbacks that(8 more words not shown)
- DFew zoologists have(16 more words not shown)
- EThe size of(9 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Captivity adds dangers. It might remove dangers, too.
The leatherbacks encounter fatal diseases they would not encounter in the wild. That's a real cost. But moving a turtle into captivity changes more than its exposure to those diseases. What if it also gets medical care? What if it no longer faces predators? Perhaps it avoids some diseases found in its natural environment. Those are possibilities to investigate, not facts we're entitled to assume.
So I'm not ready to conclude that the turtles should fare worse just because one part of their situation gets worse. A new danger could be offset by protection from another danger. That would help explain why captive and wild leatherbacks have about the same chance of reaching their maximum possible lifespan.
What we’re looking for
The question asks us to resolve that apparent surprise. Keep both sides in view: why is the chance of reaching that age about the same even though captivity introduces fatal diseases? I want something showing what helps captive turtles, or what makes life in the wild dangerous enough to balance that new disadvantage.
Working the answers
- A
Comparing leatherbacks with other reptiles doesn't explain the comparison we need. Crocodiles could face far more diseases, and we'd still wonder why captive leatherbacks have the same chance of reaching their maximum age as wild leatherbacks. The relevant contrast is between two living conditions for leatherbacks.
- B
Sea turtles might outlive almost every other marine animal under either living condition. That would tell us something about sea turtles compared with fish or other animals, but it wouldn't explain why the additional diseases in captivity don't reduce the stated survival chance.
- CCorrect
Predators kill most leatherbacks that die in the wild. That gives us a major danger on the wild side of the comparison. Protection from predators in captivity could offset the danger from the new diseases.
We don't need C to calculate the exact balance or prove that every captive turtle is safe. It gives us a reason the two survival chances could be about the same despite different threats: disease can take a greater toll in captivity while predation takes a greater toll in the wild.
- D
Difficulty creating a suitable captive environment adds another concern about captivity. That would make the similar survival chances harder to explain, not easier. We need an offsetting benefit of captivity or danger of the wild, not another reason captive turtles might struggle.
- E
We aren't told that anyone estimated the turtles' ages from their size. An unreliable size-to-age relationship therefore doesn't undermine the stated comparison or explain it. Don't invent a measurement method and then use an answer to fix a problem with that invented method.
More Paradox questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Paradox questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.