Annette: To persuade the town council to adopt your development plan, you should take them on a trip to visit other towns that have successfully implemented plans like yours.
Sefu: But I have a vested interest in their votes. If council members were to accept a trip from me, it would give the appearance of undue influence.
Speaker 1 Summary
Annette recommends that Sefu take the town council on a trip to other towns that have successfully implemented a development plan similar to the one Sefu wants to implement
Speaker 2 Summary
Sefu points out that taking the town council on a trip in the manner Annette recommends would give the appearance of undue influence. Sefu’s implicit conclusion is that Annette’s recommendation is a bad idea.
Objective
We’re looking for a point of disagreement. The speakers disagree about whether Sefu should take the town council on a trip to other towns.
A
the council should adopt Sefu’s development plan
Not a point of disagreement. Annette recommends that Sefu take the town council on a trip, which arguably suggests Annette agrees that the council should adopt Sefu’s plan. Even if we don’t know that Annette supports Sefu’s plan, we would not know Annette’s opinion.
B
Sefu should take the council on a trip to visit other towns
This is a point of disagreement. Annette recommends Sefu take the council on a trip to other towns. Sefu’s implicit conclusion is that this is not a good idea.
C
Sefu has a vested interest in the council’s votes
Annette doesn’t express an opinion. She doesn’t refer to any interest Sefu has in the council’s votes or say anything suggesting an opinion about that issue.
D
other towns have successfully implemented similar development plans
Not a point of disagreement. Sefu doesn’t say anything suggesting a belief about other towns’ development plans. Even if you think Sefu has an opinion, it would agree with Annette’s.
E
the appearance of undue influence should be avoided
Annette doesn’t express an opinion. She doesn’t say anything suggesting an opinion about undue influence and whether it should be avoided.
The official listing of an animal species as endangered triggers the enforcement of legal safeguards designed to protect endangered species, such as tighter animal export and trade restrictions and stronger antipoaching laws. Nevertheless, there have been many cases in which the decline in the wild population of a species was more rapid after that species was listed as endangered than before it was so listed.
"Surprising" Phenomenon
Why have some animal species declined faster in the wild after being listed as endangered, even though this status is meant to provide legal protection?
Objective
The correct answer will be a hypothesis that explains how listing a species as endangered can lead to an increase in the rate of population decline. It will explain a key difference between the intended legal protections and the actual consequences of listing a species as endangered by connecting population decline to public awareness or attention around the endangered species.
A
The process of officially listing a species as endangered can take many years.
This might explain why the rate of population decline continues after a species is listed as endangered (perhaps the listing came too late and the damage is done), but it does not explain why the rate of population decline increases as soon as an animal is listed as endangered.
B
Public campaigns to save endangered animal species often focus only on those species that garner the public’s affection.
This does not connect public attention around endangered animals to the rate of decline in the animals’ population, so it does not help us to explain why a species’ rate of population decline increases after it is listed as endangered.
C
The number of animal species listed as endangered has recently increased dramatically.
This does not explain the connection between the “endangered” status and an increase in population decline. There may be more endangered species than ever, but we still do not know why population decline increases after a species is listed as endangered.
D
Animals are more desirable to collectors when they are perceived to be rare.
This is the only answer choice that could explain the endangered status leading to increased population decline. The perceived rarity of an endangered species makes it more desirable to collectors, who are more likely to illegally obtain it and thus increase population decline.
E
Poachers find it progressively more difficult to locate animals of a particular species as that species’ population declines.
This does not explain why a species’ population decline increases after it is listed as endangered. If anything, poachers’ inability to locate a particular species might decrease that species’ population decline.
Most recently hired programmer → laid off