Logical reasoning PrepTest 113 · Section 3 · Question 12

NA

Argument Structure Questions

Phenomenon - Flight

Explanation 1 - It developed first in marine reptiles (scales clearly developed into feathers)

Conclusion - This explanation is wrong, since bats have no scales and nonmarine reptiles have scales

Explanation 2 - It developed first in land-dwelling reptiles

Explanation 3 - It developed first in tree-dwelling reptiles (their limbs developed wings to help jump from branch to branch

What a stimulus! The topic is the development of flight, and we get three hypotheses for it. We should be tracking these different hypotheses generally, but we also can’t lose sight of the statement in question, as it’d be easier to get bogged down in this question and “work past” an anticipation.

The argument starts with a hypothesis about the origins of flight raised by some biologists - it developed from the scales of marine reptiles. However, the argument then pivots to what “[o]ther” biologists “rightly” think - that this explanation is wrong. Since the author weighs in to say that this view is right, it’s a conclusion of the argument. And the statement in question is one of the two reasons given for throwing out that opening hypothesis (it’s a counterexample to that hypothesis, of sorts).

The rest of the stimulus goes on to discuss other origins of flight, but the author doesn’t similarly weigh in on whether these hypotheses are correct. So we’re left with the statement in question being a counterexample/premise used to argue against one hypothesis (flight developed from marine reptiles), which serves as the main point of the argument (as it’s the only opinion we get from the author).