Logical reasoning PrepTest 107 · Section 3 · Question 15

Incorrect. The stimulus presents a possible way to address the problems threatening the condor, so this answer is too certain and negative.

Incorrect. The stimulus notes that captive breeding is "[o]ne possible way" to save the condor, not the "best" way.

Incorrect. The stimulus brings up a potential way to "eliminate the effects" of the environmental factors, so this answer is too strong and negative in saying it's "almost impossible" to do so.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts

Question Type:
Must Be True

Stimulus Summary:
Problem Pt. 1 - Condor survives in wild → Breeding population greatly increased
Breeding population greatly increased → Most eggs hatch
Problem Pt. 2 - Environmental factors make it very unlikely most eggs will hatch
Potential Solution - Breeding birds in captivity and releasing them into wild

Answer Anticipation:
The stimulus here is an interesting mix of a bunch of different kinds of statements, all built around a common pattern—a Problem/Solution argument.

It starts with a conditional that highlights the problem—the breeding population greatly increasing is a necessary condition for the condor to survive in the wild. This, in turn, requires that most eggs hatch—another conditional. From these two statements, we can say that for condors to survive in the wild, it requires that most eggs hatch.

There's also a reason for why this is a requirement—only a few eggs can be produced by a breeding pair over their lives. There's no indication what "only a few" actually means, so this statement doesn't provide much specificity, but we should note it because it's a reason for a problem.

There's also another aspect to the problem—environmental factors make it unlikely that this necessary condition will be met. Things aren't looking good.

One "possible way" to address the environmental factors is then presented—raise the birds in captivity, and then release them. Since the argument believes this will address the problem, it must be the case that it has the potential to allow for most condor eggs to hatch.

However, our inferences here are all small combinations of several statements, and others are certainly possible. We should head into the answers understanding these statements and staying flexible to find a supported one.

Answer Explanation:
For the condor to survive in the wild, most of the eggs must hatch. And currently, enough aren't—as both it's required that the breeding population must "increase" for the condor to survive, and most eggs hatching is currently "extremely unlikely" because of environmental issues. Since it's currently the case that most eggs aren't hatching, and that's a requirement for the condor to survive, it must be the case that if more eggs don't hatch, the condor won't survive in the wild.

Key Takeaway:
Even when you make an inference in a Must Be True question, the correct answer may not line up perfectly with it. Here, we anticipated answers that dealt with the proposed solution to the problem (which wasn't really relevant to the answer), and another that chained two conditionals together (which was a significant part of the correct answer, but not the entirety of it). Don't get so locked into your anticipation in this question type that you fail to see a correct answer when it shows up!

Incorrect. The stimulus says that "any significant" increase in the condor population is going to have to stem from ensuring most of the eggs hatch, not from increasing egg production. There's no discussion of that as a possibility, let alone the "most feasible" one.