As symbols of the freedom of the wilderness, bald eagles have the unique capacity to inspire people and foster in the...

zacharydtan on July 24, 2019

Bump

Ravi on August 6, 2019

@EmilyMarieMenendez and @zacharydtan,

This question is asking us for the main point.

The argument is basically saying that lots of people don't care much
about the conservation of threatened species. The argument brings up
the bald eagle and says that if we focus conservation efforts around
it (since it inspires people and fosters in them a sympathetic
attitude toward the needs of other threatened species), this will
eventually bring attention to the conservation of all kinds of
threatened species.

In a sense, yes, this argument is arguing by saying if there's a
certain cause, there'll be a certain effect.

It's tough to identify the conclusion on this question, but we just
need to make sure we stay focused on thinking which statement supports
which. The goal of the argument is to garner more support for
conservation efforts. Without sympathy, that support isn't going to be
obtained (this is the second claim of the argument). However, the bald
eagle is capable of garnering that sympathy (this is the first claim
of the argument). Thus, the bald eagle is the best threatened species
to start conservation efforts with (this is the third claim and is the
conclusion of the argument). This leads us to (B), which states, "The
conservation of bald eagles is the first necessary step in conserving
other endangered species." (B) does a great job of summarizing the
third sentence of the stimulus, which is the main point, so it's the
correct answer choice.

Does this make sense? Let us know if you have any other questions!