Principle: People should not feed wild animals because it makes them dependent on humans and less likely to survive o...

Karla on January 8 at 07:49PM

Explain please

the answer choices confused me and I ended wasting time. Can I please get a break down of the argument and answer choices?

1 Reply

Annie on January 10 at 05:22PM

Hi @karla.cruz181,

This question is set up in a confusing manner. Essentially, it is asking you to find the answer choice which is an exception to the principle, and therefore allows for the situation to be justified.

Principle: People shouldn't feed wild animals because it makes them dependent on humans.
Situation: But, bird loves commonly feed wild birds.
Answer Choice: ?? (One which makes the situation okay, even in light of the principle)

Answer Choices:
(A) is incorrect. This supports the idea that feeding wild birds, like wild animals, is bad for them and makes them less likely to survive.

(B) is incorrect. This is about the benefit to humans, not animals, and is therefore irrelevant.

(C) is incorrect. There is nothing to indicate why congregation would be good or bad for the birds. Therefore, this answer choice is irrelevant.

(D) is incorrect. This answer choice is tricky. This seems to say that bird lovers help birds by working to preserve their habitats. But, this is actually outside the scope of the question. The stimulus discusses only feeding wild animals/birds, it has nothing to do with conserving their habitat.

(E) is correct. This provides an explanation for why it's okay that bird lovers feed birds even though its generally bad for people to feed wild animals. It tells us that birds have to depend in part on humans for food, so we are not concerned about the part of the principle which states that feeding animals will make them dependent. Birds have to be dependent, so it's okay that bird lovers feed them.