PrepTest 141, Section 1, 1st passage: “Charles Darwin objected…”

Highlight the author’s conclusions:

p2:
nature provides numerous examples of attributes that are not adaptations for reproductive success

p3: 
their [mutations] persistence from one generation to the next is not explainable by natural selection

p4: 
the study of mass extinctions in paleontology has undermined the strict constructionist claim that natural selection can account for every species’ success or failure

It [the mass extinctions] does not conform to the strict constructionist view…

***

p1 is all background, establishing that Darwin and the “strict constructionists” disagree. The author hasn’t tried to get us to agree or disagree with anybody…yet.

p2 is background up to “But in fact…” If the author says there are examples of something, you should anticipate they’re going to explain those examples next. So whatever they’re showing with the examples is their conclusion.

p3 is the first example, with a more specific version of the same overall conclusion from p2.

p4 is the second example, also with a more specific version of the overall conclusion. That’s basically the same conclusion stated twice, so it’s totally cool with me if you only highlighted it once: either at the beginning, or after the “But while…, “

Map the wording of the answers to the reference in the prompt, or to the author’s conclusions:

1. Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the passage?

Map the answers to the author’s conclusions.

(A) “Evidence from two areas of science” maps perfectly to the two paragraphs of support: one talked about “mutations” and the other about “extinctions”. You also love “undermines the strict constructionist claim”. That’s what all three conclusions we highlighted are doing. And to top it off, “natural selection is the only…” gets the details right.

This is the first question in the section, so if this was timed I’d love to see you confidently pick (A) and move on.

(B) There’s no “new evidence”, and “failure of most extinct species” doesn’t even get the strict constructionists’ view right (they’d say it’s all species cuz, y’know, they’re strict). And the author disagreed with them anyway. This one’s way, way off.

(C) The passage does refer to “nonadaptive as well as adaptive changes”, but there’s nothing here about disagreeing with those damn constructionists.

(D) This is an accurate detail from the background info the first paragraph, so don’t lose sight of what the prompt is asking for. This is definitely NOT the “main point”.

(E) I like “disprove the claim that…”, but the author isn’t disagreeing about survival of the fittest overall. Just that its not the only factor in evolution.

(A) is the correct answer.

2. According to the author, mammals were able to survive catastrophic environmental changes that occurred roughly 65 million years ago because they

Map the answers to the reference in the prompt. Scan the text or use the search box to find “65” and you find it quickly. It says “Smaller animal species are generally better able to survive…”

It’s (B). Let’s not overthink it. The key is not to use anything from anywhere else in the passage except where the reference in the prompt tells you to look.

(B) is the correct answer.

3. The author asserts which one of the following regarding mutations of genetic material?

Map the answers to the reference in the prompt. Search “mutations” or “genetic” and you know the right answer is in the third paragraph.

All the answers start with “The majority of such mutations…”, so I’m checking for what this paragraph says about a “majority” of the mutations. It says “most mutations fall into neither category” and that “most substitutions…have no effect on reproductive success.” I expect the right answer to be a pretty close match for one of those statements.

And there it is in (D), which repeats the whole “have no effect…” phrase.

(D) is the correct answer.

4. The author would be most likely to agree with which one of the following statements?

Map the answers to the author’s conclusions. 

(A) “almost none” is way too strong. The author didn’t say anything that extreme.

(B) You gotta love “not proof of its adaptation”. The strict constructionists would say it IS proof of adaptation, and our author is here to disagree with those chumps.

(C) “Only” is suspiciously strong. That won’t map to anything the author says, and in fact I think the author kinda disagrees since they said most mutations are neutral.

(D) “generally unable to survive” is distorting the comparison the passage makes, which only said smaller animals generally survive better. It didn’t say anything about their ability to survive generally.

(E) This is too specific to map to our author’s statements. The passage doesn’t contrast “form” and “behavior” like that anywhere.

(B) is the correct answer.

5. The author’s stance toward the arguments of the strict constructionist Darwinians can most accurately be described as one of

Map the answers to the author’s conclusions. 

It’s definitely (A). You almost couldn’t write it better yourself.

(B) “Mild” could work if the disagreement was qualified. But the author doesn’t really spend much time making concessions or giving the strict constructionists credit for anything.

No one picked (C), (D), or (E) right? Look at those conclusions we highlighted one more time. No way the author’s stance is “neutral” or positive.

(A) is the correct answer.

6. Which one of the following most accurately and completely describes the function of the second paragraph of the passage

Map the answers to the reference in the prompt. The second paragraph started with background meant to set up the author disagreeing with the strict constructionists and introducing the examples.

(A) “It outlines the objections…” Stop. No it doesn’t. An “outline” is like a high-level overview in the form of a list, right? No outlining in this passage. And where do you see “objections”? Me neither, because there aren’t any.

(B) “It lists recent evidence…” Stop. No it doesn’t. It says there are examples, but doesn’t list what they are. You’re a lawyer though, so that distinction is quite clear to you.

(C) Alright I read this one a little more, haha. It’s okay at first but it gets the “why” wrong. What would “recently gotten so much attention” map to? The paragraph doesn’t say anything like that.

(D) “It enumerates…” Stop. Enumerating is counting. Like literally, “1 is blah, 2 is blah blah, and 3 is blah blah blah” Using the word “numerous” doesn’t count.

Alright (E), we’re looking at you. Were you thrown by “ramifications”? Because that can definitely describe the second part of an if-then conditional statement like we see in this paragraph. Ramifications are similar to ‘results’ or ‘implications’. And that “clarify the evidence” bit is perfect! It mentions the support that’s coming up, exactly like we did when we tagged this paragraph.

(E) is the correct answer.

7. The primary purpose of the passage is to

Map the answers to the author’s conclusions.

(A) The author is disagreeing with something, so “in favor” doesn’t map.

(B) “summarize” doesn’t capture the argument going on here.

(C) is a little generic, but it’s not bringing in any new wording that doesn’t map. The “particular view” could definitely be strict constructionist Darwinism. I likes.

(D) Careful. The author isn’t criticizing the “proponents”, just their argument. And the passage doesn’t say it’s a “traditional theory” anyway.

(E) “popularity” isn’t a part of any of the author’s conclusions.

(C) is the correct answer.