PrepTest 142

Incorrect. The premise preceding it (that supports the blank) starts with "whatever the difference in heritage and habitat," so circling back to living in the same environment would invalidate that qualification to an extent, and thus this answer isn't correct.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Argument Completion

Stimulus Summary:
Premise 1 – A organ/structure is the only way to accomplish a task
Premise 2 – Even in different homes, organisms have similar needs
Intermediate conclusion – __________
Main point – Some organs/body structures evolved separately in different species

Answer Anticipation:
This Argument Completion question is interesting in that it's asking us to fill in an intermediate conclusion. That first clause ("Often") backs up the second clause ("so . . . "), making that second clause a conclusion. That statement is followed up with an, "After all," highlighting that the following statement is support, and it builds to the part of the argument we need to complete—making it an intermediate conclusion supported by that second premise.

This structure is important because we need to know what's supporting the blank we're supposed to fill in, and what it's supporting. Here, we need a statement supported by different organisms in different habitats having similar needs that then goes on to support the conclusion that it should be unsurprising that some organs/structures developed in different species. So the correct answer should connect these ideas to serve as a bridge—an intermediate conclusion—between those ideas. Something like, "and so these different species would develop similar organs to meet those needs."

Answer Explanation:
This answer connects the premise directly supporting the intermediate conclusion with the conclusion itself (building off of the premise that directly supports the main conclusion). If these animals have similar needs, then they will at times develop similar means of solving them.

Key Takeaway:
Most Argument Completion questions ask you to fill in the conclusion. Most of those that don't ask you to fill in the conclusion ask you to fill in direct support for the conclusion (often introduced with a "Since . . . "). This question, however, asked you to fill in an intermediate conclusion, and recognizing that was important in understanding what ideas the correct answer needed to connect.

Incorrect. This answer doesn't tie the adaptations into being similar between the species, so it doesn't build off of the idea in the premise supporting it and move in the direction of the conclusion.

Incorrect. The premise directly supporting the blank is about animals with similar needs, so it'd be weird to shift to discussing animals with different needs.

Incorrect. Eyes or wings were given as examples, not as the only types of adaptations that would develop multiple times, so this answer is too reductive.