PrepTest 120, Section 2, Question 21
Until recently, biologists were unable to explain the(439 more words not shown)
With which one of the(26 more words not shown)
- AThe view contradicts(6 more words not shown)
- BThe view suggests(8 more words not shown)
- CThe view presumes(12 more words not shown)
- DThe view ignores(13 more words not shown)
- EThe view erroneously(11 more words not shown)
Reading the passage
These biologists propose the newer explanation. A parasite doesn't have to protect its current host if it can reproduce and spread successfully to others. I expect them to say the prevailing account misses that alternative route to success, rather than that harmless coexistence never occurs.
Working the answers
- A
We aren't given a claim that the prevailing view contradicts most of the evidence. The biologists identify something its explanation doesn't cover.
- B
This is what the newer hypothesis says about death-causing pathogens. The question asks for the biologists' assessment of the prevailing view, so B assigns their own alternative to the view they're revising.
- C
The biologists don't deny that harmless relationships exist. They explain how success can also occur without one.
- DCorrect
The prevailing rationale emphasizes surviving by leaving the host unharmed. The newer account adds another possibility: transmit enough pathogens to new hosts to outweigh the losses caused by incapacitating the old one.
The earlier phrase “in general” does leave room for exceptions. We shouldn't pretend it means every parasite must be harmless. D identifies the gap in that explanatory account: it doesn't explain this other route to evolutionary success.
- E
Nothing says the prevailing view assumes hosts never harm parasites. That reverses the direction of harm being discussed.
More Application questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Application questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.