Over the last century, paleontologists have used small differences between fossil specimens to classify triceratops into sixteen species. This classification is unjustified, however, since the specimens used to distinguish eleven of the species come from animals that lived in the same area at the same time.
Which of the following, if true, would enable the conclusion of the argument to be properly drawn?
(A) Not every species that lived in a given area is preserved as a fossil.
(B) At least one individual of every true species of triceratops has been discovered as a fossil specimen.
(C) No geographical area ever supports more than three similar species at the same time.
(D) In many species, individuals display quite marked variation.
(E) Differences between fossil specimens of triceratops that came from the same area are no less distinctive than differences between specimens that came from different areas.
I just could not understand this question....Please explain the meaning of conclsion here in this case
GMAT Forum
7 postsPage 1 of 1
- philanderer.lover
- Students
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 5:58 am
- suketu333
- Students
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2009 9:55 am
Re: triceratops
The question here is an argument made by paleontologists to have triceratops classified into sixteen species based on small differences. And the conclusion drawn out of this is that the species classication can not be justified because specimens used to distinguish eleven species come from the same area and same region.
The bridge between the argument and the drawn conclusion can be the answer choice E which adds to the argument and supports the conclusion.
The bridge between the argument and the drawn conclusion can be the answer choice E which adds to the argument and supports the conclusion.
- rajkapoor
- Course Students
- Posts: 37
- Joined: Fri Sep 18, 2009 1:02 pm
Re: triceratops
Instructors , please review this explanation ,especially the negating aspect
Reason for classification : small differences in species
BUT 11 specimens came from same area at the same time
(my own example - specimens could have been humanatops .. one with white hair , blonde ,brunette , black hair - think Flintstones in New York ) ...
This classification is being questioned on the grounds that
"since they came from the same area and occurred at the same time, and that these differences are so small , we could be making classes of species out of individuals with different variation rather than true differentiating factors" - (think back in terms of human and hair traits ) .
Now we could classify taking hair as a criterion , but what if the classification was done from species found in Tokyo and New York. Then hair which was earlier considered as a classification factor now doesn't remain one in-spite of the fact that New Yorkers have different hair color.
We are looking for the assumption that shows why the classification is not justified.
A) Not every species that lived in a given area is preserved as a fossil.
not relevant - we are talking about those that were fossilized
(B) At least one individual of every true species of triceratops has been discovered as a fossil specimen.
"okay ,but this doesn't lead us further that differences in local species doesn't matter"
(C) No geographical area ever supports more than three similar species at the same time.
"this actually goes either way -against and in favor of the conclusion - if only 3 can be found , it means that rest 8 are actually true different species / on the other hand even 3 similar species being classified as different species makes the classification unjustified"
(D) In many species, individuals display quite marked variation.
"This was a trap question , i got caught into it until I moved to E choice"
in Many species - great - the answer looked tempting and satisfied my line of thought.
But , this could be true about many species , does it mean it is necessarily true about triceratops or in my case humanatops" - nopppe... so it goes out
(E) Differences between fossil specimens of triceratops that came from the same area are no less distinctive than differences between specimens that came from different areas.
- it says that the differences among new yorkers were at least as many as those among New Yorkers and tokyo (mind you - not 'differences were same' but 'differences were at least as many ' ). So we cannot just pick the differences among New Yorkers and make these differences as classification factors.
Negating this answer choice:
Differences between fossil specimens of triceratops that came from the same area ARE LESS distinctive than differences between specimens that came from different areas.
this supports the counter argument that classification is unjustified.
Hence E
Reason for classification : small differences in species
BUT 11 specimens came from same area at the same time
(my own example - specimens could have been humanatops .. one with white hair , blonde ,brunette , black hair - think Flintstones in New York ) ...
This classification is being questioned on the grounds that
"since they came from the same area and occurred at the same time, and that these differences are so small , we could be making classes of species out of individuals with different variation rather than true differentiating factors" - (think back in terms of human and hair traits ) .
Now we could classify taking hair as a criterion , but what if the classification was done from species found in Tokyo and New York. Then hair which was earlier considered as a classification factor now doesn't remain one in-spite of the fact that New Yorkers have different hair color.
We are looking for the assumption that shows why the classification is not justified.
A) Not every species that lived in a given area is preserved as a fossil.
not relevant - we are talking about those that were fossilized
(B) At least one individual of every true species of triceratops has been discovered as a fossil specimen.
"okay ,but this doesn't lead us further that differences in local species doesn't matter"
(C) No geographical area ever supports more than three similar species at the same time.
"this actually goes either way -against and in favor of the conclusion - if only 3 can be found , it means that rest 8 are actually true different species / on the other hand even 3 similar species being classified as different species makes the classification unjustified"
(D) In many species, individuals display quite marked variation.
"This was a trap question , i got caught into it until I moved to E choice"
in Many species - great - the answer looked tempting and satisfied my line of thought.
But , this could be true about many species , does it mean it is necessarily true about triceratops or in my case humanatops" - nopppe... so it goes out
(E) Differences between fossil specimens of triceratops that came from the same area are no less distinctive than differences between specimens that came from different areas.
- it says that the differences among new yorkers were at least as many as those among New Yorkers and tokyo (mind you - not 'differences were same' but 'differences were at least as many ' ). So we cannot just pick the differences among New Yorkers and make these differences as classification factors.
Negating this answer choice:
Differences between fossil specimens of triceratops that came from the same area ARE LESS distinctive than differences between specimens that came from different areas.
this supports the counter argument that classification is unjustified.
Hence E
- Ben Ku
- ManhattanGMAT Staff
- Posts: 817
- Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2007 7:49 pm
Re: triceratops
Please cite the source (author) of this problem. We cannot reply unless a source is cited (and, if no source is cited, we will have to delete the post!). Thanks.
Ben Ku
Instructor
ManhattanGMAT
Instructor
ManhattanGMAT
- philanderer.lover
- Students
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 5:58 am
Re: triceratops
Source is 1000cr
- priyassaxena
- Students
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:04 pm
Re: triceratops
conclusion :
This classification is unjustified. Why? Since the specimens used to distinguish eleven of the species come from animals that lived in the same area at the same time.
This means the classification is invalid because 11 of the specimens come from animals that lived in the same area. Maybe there is certain limit on the number of species which can live in a certain place at a certain time for the animals to be properly classified. Option C reveals that.
E says : irrespective of where the specimens were found they are still distinct. So the classification cannot be considered invalid just because 11 specimens were found at the same place. Doesn't this undermine the conclusion ?
Thanks.
This classification is unjustified. Why? Since the specimens used to distinguish eleven of the species come from animals that lived in the same area at the same time.
This means the classification is invalid because 11 of the specimens come from animals that lived in the same area. Maybe there is certain limit on the number of species which can live in a certain place at a certain time for the animals to be properly classified. Option C reveals that.
E says : irrespective of where the specimens were found they are still distinct. So the classification cannot be considered invalid just because 11 specimens were found at the same place. Doesn't this undermine the conclusion ?
Thanks.
- RonPurewal
- Students
- Posts: 19744
- Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 8:23 am
Re: triceratops
well, i know that 1000sc is a banned source, but i'm not sure whether the same is true of 1000cr, so i will go ahead and answer this.
first, you've got to identify the conclusion of the argument correctly. in this argument, the conclusion is "the classification system is unjustified".
also, there is basically only one premise in the entire argument. (the first statement is just background.)
so, basically, a simplified version of the argument would run like this:
PREMISE: they got specimens for 11 supposedly different species from the same area.
CONCLUSION: therefore, the entire classification system is unjustified.
given this simplified version, it's a lot more clear what we have to find: namely, we need some sort of assertion that it is simply not ok to find 11 different species in the same area.
on this basis, we can select (c) as the correct answer.
couple of posters on this thread have picked choice (e), but that choice actually weakens the argument -- if that choice is true, that it lends extra legitimacy to the idea that many different species could have come from the same region.
first, you've got to identify the conclusion of the argument correctly. in this argument, the conclusion is "the classification system is unjustified".
also, there is basically only one premise in the entire argument. (the first statement is just background.)
so, basically, a simplified version of the argument would run like this:
PREMISE: they got specimens for 11 supposedly different species from the same area.
CONCLUSION: therefore, the entire classification system is unjustified.
given this simplified version, it's a lot more clear what we have to find: namely, we need some sort of assertion that it is simply not ok to find 11 different species in the same area.
on this basis, we can select (c) as the correct answer.
couple of posters on this thread have picked choice (e), but that choice actually weakens the argument -- if that choice is true, that it lends extra legitimacy to the idea that many different species could have come from the same region.
7 posts Page 1 of 1