(A) says, "Passage A discusses and rejects a position that is put forth in passage B."
Although it's true that both passages reject the smell hypothesis, passage A does not reject any position that's posited by passage B. They both reject the same hypothesis, so (A) is out.
(B) says, "Passage A gives several examples of a phenomenon for which passage B gives only one example."
(B) has the relationship between the two passages backwards. Passage A only discusses one phenomenon, bee communication, while passage B discusses two phenomena (bees and primates). Thus, (B) is out.
(C) says, "Passage A is concerned in its entirety with a phenomenon that passage B discusses in support of a more general thesis."
Passage A is more specific than passage B because it only discusses bees. Passage B only uses bees to support its broader claim that some animals communicate symbolically. With this, (C) makes a lot of sense, as A is solely concerned with B communication, whereas B only uses bee communication to support its bigger claim. Thus, (C) is the correct answer choice.
(D) says, "Passage A proposes a scientific explanation for a phenomenon that passage B argues cannot be plausibly explained."
Passage B believes that bee communication has a plausible explanation in that bee communication is a type of symbolic communication. For this reason, (D) is incorrect.
(E) says, "Passage A provides a historical account of the origins of a phenomenon that is the primary concern of passage B."
(E) is close, but it's not quite there. Passage A does in fact trace the development of human knowledge about bee communication, but the problem is that bees are not the primary concern of passage B. Rather, bees' communication is used as an example to support the larger claim that some animals symbolically communicate. Thus, (E) is incorrect.
Does this make sense? Let us know if you have any more questions!
