<p>For thousands of years, people believed that owls were more
like gods than animals. Even in modern times they have been used
to signify wisdom, magic, and power, but the simple truth is that
Line owls are no more divine than other birds. The large, round heads
(5) and huge, forward-facing eyes that inclined ancient observers to
believe that owls possessed divine intelligence are simply
natural adaptations developed to help the predators catch the
small animals that make up their food supply.
Although owls do not possess any of the mystical powers
(10) often attributed to them in mythology, they are formidable
hunters whose skill surpasses that of other birds of prey. Their
acute senses ensure that owls rarely fail to notice a potential
meal, and their ability to fly silently means that the
unfortunate mouse identified by the owl as its next snack never
(15) realizes it is the object of an attack until too late. </p>
<p>the question is:
2.The last sentence of the first paragraph provides
(A) a summary of the facts presented earlier
(B) an example to prove a controversial theory presented earlier
(C) an explanation that rebuts a misconception presented earlier
(D) an assertion that will be proved later on
(E) a view that will be contradicted later on </p>
<p>I got D, but sparknotes said C. Their reasoning for C is “The final sentence of the first paragraph explains that those features of the owls physiognomy that suggest divine intelligence are really just natural adaptations evolved to help them be more successful hunters. This explanation rebuts the misconception presented at the start of the paragraph that owls are more like gods than humans. None of the other answers offers an accurate description of the sentence.” My reasoning for D is that the last sentence of the first paragraph is only an assertion, and is in no way an explanation because the sentence only stated that the owl’s features help them catch small animals rather then "explain"ed somehting “that rebuts a misconception stated earlier.” What do you guys think?</p>
<p>Well, I would right away eliminate D and E, because there’s nothing about the passage that indicates there’s more to come. The last sentence gives a sense of completion, and nicely wraps up the passage, so I wouldn’t count on more information being provided later on. But it doesn’t summarize the above passage, just adds to it, so I think you can safely eliminate A. Most of the passage talks about how owls used to be considered divine, which the last sentence doesn’t even touch on, so it’s definitely not a summary. As for B, that answer choice hinges upon the idea of natural selection equippin the owls with these features being a controversial theory, which may be true, but no hint of controversy is hinted at in the passage. Divinity vs. evolution question is best defined, within the context of this passage, as a misconception vs. new empiricism; that is, the former is now considered obsolete, whereas the latter idea is the currently accepted explanation. So I would say that B is a wrong answer too, which leaves C as the best answer.</p>
<p>My take:
A, B, and E are out right off the bat (very common in CR: three obviously wrong answers).</p>
<p>C: “The large…heads” “and huge…eyes” “are simply
natural adaptations…” is a well known fact now, that does not require proof.<br>
The last sentence of the passage is just an illustration of this fact.
Therefore, an ancient, and even recent (“…have been used…”) view that these features are a sign of “…intelligence” is a misconception.</p>
<p>D is out because there is no proof in the passage.</p>
<p>I think it’s C, because the first paragraph opened up about how for many centuries ago, owls were seen as mystical… but later he claims that owls are just normal birds, but they have special attributes…therefore the last sentence means that the owls aren’t mystical, but they have very acute senses,though. therefore supporting the answer C, about hte rebuttal</p>
<p>D and E are out, because we don’t know what other passage that could be…</p>
<p>A is wrong, because that one sentence can’t possibly summarize the whole passage.</p>
<p>B is wrong, because he is actually disagreeing with people’s views about owls being mystical</p>
<p>One should be careful with the “later on” in D and E.
In this question it applies to whatever follows the FIRST PARAGRAPH, not necessarily the whole passage.</p>