<p>Three questions on a passage from CollegeBoard's online course:</p>
<p>The world can be classified in different ways,
depending on one's interests and principles of clas-
sification. The classifications (also known as
Line taxonomies) in turn determine which comparisons
5 seem natural or unnatural, which literal or analog-
ical. For example, it has been common to classify
living creatures into three distinct groups—plants,
animals, and humans. According to this classifica-
tion, human beings are not a special kind of
10 animal, nor animals a special kind of plant. Thus
any comparisons between the three groups are
strictly analogical. Reasoning from inheritance in
garden peas to inheritance in fruit flies, and from
these two species to inheritance in human beings,
15 is sheer poetic metaphor.
Another mode of classifying living creatures is
commonly attributed to Aristotle. Instead of treat-
ing plants, animals, and humans as distinct
groups, they are nested. All living creatures
20 possess a vegetative soul that enables them to
grow and metabolize. Of these, some also have a
sensory soul that enables them to sense their envi-
ronments and move. One species also has a
rational soul that is capable of true understanding.
25 Thus, human beings are a special sort of animal,
and animals are a special sort of plant. Given this
classification, reasoning from human beings to all
other species with respect to the attributes of the
vegetative soul is legitimate, reasoning from
30 human beings to other animals with respect to the
attributes of the sensory soul is also legitimate,
but reasoning from the rational characteristics of
the human species to any other species is merely
analogical. According to both classifications, the
35 human species is unique. In the first, it has a king-
dom all to itself; in the second, it stands at the
pinnacle of the taxonomic hierarchy.
Homo sapiens is unique. All species are. But
this sort of uniqueness is not enough for many
40 (probably most) people, philosophers included. For
some reason, it is very important that the species
to which we belong be uniquely unique. It is of
utmost importance that the human species be
insulated from all other species with respect to
45 how we explain certain qualities. Human beings
clearly are capable of developing and learning
languages. For some reason, it is very important
that the waggle dance performed by bees * not
count as a genuine language. I have never been
50 able to understand why. I happen to think that the
waggle dance differs from human languages to
such a degree that little is gained by terming them
both "languages," but even if "language" is so
defined that the waggle dance slips in, bees still
55 remain bees. It is equally important to some that
no other species use tools. No matter how inge-
nious other species get in the manipulation of
objects in their environment, it is absolutely
essential that nothing they do count as "tool use."
60 I, however, fail to see what difference it makes
whether any of these devices such as probes and
anvils, etc. are really tools. All the species
involved remain distinct biological species no
matter what decisions are made. Similar observa-
65 tions hold for rationality and anything a computer
might do.</p>
<p>The author uses the words "For some reason" in lines 40-41 to express
(A) rage
(B) disapproval
(C) despair
(D) sympathy
(E) uncertainty</p>
<p>Seriously, "disapproval" is the answer? If CR questions were all like this, I would seriously get all of them wrong. I read the third paragraph twice, and I strongly hold the impression that the author believes (not mocks) the idea that we, the human species, are unique. "For some reason" can only express uncertainty as to why many people believe we are unique. In no way is this disapproval.</p>
<p>If the author had wished to explain why "most" people (line 40) feel the way they do, the explanation would have probably focused on the
(A) reality of distinct biological species
(B) most recent advances in biological research
(C) behavioral similarities between Homo sapiens and other species
(D) role of language in the development of technology
(E) lack of objectivity in the classification of Homo sapiens</p>
<p>I was stuck between Choice A and D. Choice E ended up being correct. I can agree with that, but I went Choice A because of this sentence: "All the species involved remain distinct biological species no matter what decisions are made." (clearly an assertion by the author). Can someone explain to me why Choice A is incorrect? (btw Collegeboard's explanation is terrible; it's just a restatement of the answer).</p>
<p>28 In the third paragraph, the author criticizes those who believe that
(A) the similarities between Homo sapiens and other species are more significant than their differences
(B) the differences between Homo sapiens and other animals are those of degree, not kind
(C) Homo sapiens and animals belong to separate and distinct divisions of the living world
(D) Homo sapiens and animals have the ability to control their environment
(E) Homo sapiens and other organisms can be arranged in Aristotelian nested groups</p>
<p>Choice C is the correct answer. How can I know if he criticized them? To me, there was no indication of criticism. The author made clear, unmistakable statements that reflected his own opinion. Please someone help me.</p>