The question stem reads: The reasoning in which of the following is most similar to that in the naturalist's argument? This is a Parallel question.
The naturalist begins by claiming that a species can survive the change in an environment as long as the change is not too rapid. The naturalist has provided a general rule saying that the change can be ok for a species, with the caveat that the change does not occur too rapidly. The naturalist concludes that the threats humans create to woodland species arise not from cutting down trees but from the rate at which we are cutting down trees. The naturalist has applied the universal rule about species to the specific example of woodland species. So the problem is not that change we are creating by cutting down trees, but the because we are causing the change too rapidly.
When evaluating an answer choice, we need a universal rule with a caveat. The correct AC will apply that universal rule to a specific example and say that the specific example is failing to satisfy the caveat.
Answer Choice (A) is incorrect. (A) does not provide a universal rule; it only gives a specific rule about fossil fuels. Additionally, (A) 's rule about fossil fuels lacks the caveat we are looking for.
Answer Choice (B) is incorrect. We can quickly eliminate (B) because of the word "many." Remember, we need a universal rule, so if (B) was right, it would begin with "all people." Additionally, (B) 's rule lacks the caveat we are looking for, nor does (B) apply its rule to a specific example.
Answer Choice (C) is incorrect. Similar to (B), we can eliminate (C) because it says "some" when we are looking for a universal rule. Additionally, (C) also lacks the caveat, nor does (C) apply the rule to a specific example.
Correct Answer Choice (D) matches the stimulus. (D) provides a general rule that "people do not fear change," under the caveat people know what the change will bring. (D) then applies that rule to the specific example of the author's company's employees. The company's employees' fears arise from the fact the company is changing, but because they do not know what the change will bring (the caveat is not satisfied).
Answer Choice (E) is incorrect. (E) does not provide a general rule, so we can eliminate it.
A
A dense colony of the bacteria can indefinitely continue to produce enough hydrogen sulfide to kill other organisms in the area and to prevent oxygen from harming the bacteria.
B
The hydrogen sulfide produced by the bacteria kills other organisms in the area by reacting with and removing oxygen.
C
Most organisms, if killed by the hydrogen sulfide produced by the bacteria, can provide a source of food for the bacteria.
D
The bacteria can continue to thrive indefinitely only in an environment in which the hydrogen sulfide they produce has removed all oxygen and killed other organisms in the area.
E
If any colony of bacteria produces hydrogen sulfide as a waste product, it thereby ensures that it is both provided with a source of food and protected from harm by oxygen.
Application: Although Megan’s frequent reading stimulates her intellectually, it reduces the amount of time she spends interacting with other people. Therefore, it is not healthy for her to read as much as she does.
A
It misinterprets the principle as a universal claim intended to hold in all cases without exception, rather than as a mere generalization.
B
It overlooks the possibility that the benefits of a given activity may sometimes be important enough to outweigh the adverse health effects.
C
It misinterprets the principle to be, at least in part, a claim about what is unhealthy, rather than solely a claim about what is healthy.
D
It takes for granted that any decrease in the amount of time a child spends interacting with others detracts from that child’s social development.
E
It takes a necessary condition for an activity’s being healthy as a sufficient condition for its being so.