Medical College Admission Test: Verbal Reasoning, Biological Sciences, Physical Sciences, Writing Sample v1.0 (MCAT Test)

Although nihilism is commonly defined as a form of extremist political thought, the term has a broader meaning. Nihilism is in fact a complex intellectual stance with venerable roots in the history of ideas, which forms the theoretical basis for many positive assertions of modern thought. Its essence is the systematic negation of all perceptual orders and assumptions. A complete view must account for the influence of two historical crosscurrents: philosophical skepticism about the ultimacy of any truth, and the mystical quest for that same pure truth. These are united by their categorical rejection of the ג€knownג€.
The outstanding representative of the former current, David Hume (1711-1776), maintained that external reality is unknowable, since sense impressions are actually part of the contents of the mind. Their presumed correspondence to external ג€thingsג€ cannot be verified, since it can be checked only by other sense impressions. Hume further asserts that all abstract conceptions turn out, on examination, to be generalizations from sense impressions. He concludes that even such an apparently objective phenomenon as a cause-and-effect relationship between events may be no more than a subjective fabrication of the observer.
Stanley Rosen notes: ג€Hume terminates in skepticism because he finds nothing within the subject but individual impressions and ideas.ג€
For mystics of every faith, the ג€experience of nothingnessג€ is the goal of spiritual practice. Buddhist meditation techniques involve the systematic negation of all spiritual and intellectual constructs to make way for the apprehension of pure truth. St. John of the Cross similarly rejected every physical and mental symbolization of God as illusory. St. Johnג€™s spiritual legacy is, as Michael Novak puts it, ג€the constant return to inner solitude, an unbroken awareness of the emptiness at the heart of consciousness. It is a harsh refusal to allow idols to be placed in the sanctuary. It requires also a scorching gaze upon all the bureaucracies, institutions, manipulators, and hucksters who employ technology and its supposed realities to bewitch and bedazzle the psyche.ג€
Novakג€™s interpretation points to the way these philosophical and mystical traditions prepared the ground for the political nihilism of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The rejection of existing social institutions and their claims to authority is in the most basic sense made possible by Humean skepticism. The political nihilism of the Russian intelligentsia combined this radical skepticism with a near mystical faith in the power of a new beginning. Hence, their desire to destroy becomes a revolutionary affirmation; in the words of Stanley Rosen, ג€Nihilism is an attempt to overcome or repudiate the past on behalf of an unknown and unknowable, yet hoped-for, future.ג€ This fusion of skepticism and mystical re-creation can be traced in contemporary thought, for example as an element in the counterculture of the 1960s.
The passage implies that the two strands of nihilist thought:

Although nihilism is commonly defined as a form of extremist political thought, the term has a broader meaning. Nihilism is in fact a complex intellectual stance with venerable roots in the history of ideas, which forms the theoretical basis for many positive assertions of modern thought. Its essence is the systematic negation of all perceptual orders and assumptions. A complete view must account for the influence of two historical crosscurrents: philosophical skepticism about the ultimacy of any truth, and the mystical quest for that same pure truth. These are united by their categorical rejection of the ג€knownג€.
The outstanding representative of the former current, David Hume (1711-1776), maintained that external reality is unknowable, since sense impressions are actually part of the contents of the mind. Their presumed correspondence to external ג€thingsג€ cannot be verified, since it can be checked only by other sense impressions. Hume further asserts that all abstract conceptions turn out, on examination, to be generalizations from sense impressions. He concludes that even such an apparently objective phenomenon as a cause-and-effect relationship between events may be no more than a subjective fabrication of the observer.
Stanley Rosen notes: ג€Hume terminates in skepticism because he finds nothing within the subject but individual impressions and ideasג€.
For mystics of every faith, the ג€experience of nothingnessג€ is the goal of spiritual practice. Buddhist meditation techniques involve the systematic negation of all spiritual and intellectual constructs to make way for the apprehension of pure truth. St. John of the Cross similarly rejected every physical and mental symbolization of God as illusory. St. Johnג€™s spiritual legacy is, as Michael Novak puts it, ג€the constant return to inner solitude, an unbroken awareness of the emptiness at the heart of consciousness. It is a harsh refusal to allow idols to be placed in the sanctuary. It requires also a scorching gaze upon all the bureaucracies, institutions, manipulators, and hucksters who employ technology and its supposed realities to bewitch and bedazzle the psycheג€.
Novakג€™s interpretation points to the way these philosophical and mystical traditions prepared the ground for the political nihilism of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The rejection of existing social institutions and their claims to authority is in the most basic sense made possible by Humean skepticism. The political nihilism of the Russian intelligentsia combined this radical skepticism with a near mystical faith in the power of a new beginning. Hence, their desire to destroy becomes a revolutionary affirmation; in the words of Stanley Rosen, ג€Nihilism is an attempt to overcome or repudiate the past on behalf of an unknown and unknowable, yet hoped-for, future.ג€ This fusion of skepticism and mystical re-creation can be traced in contemporary thought, for example as an element in the counterculture of the 1960s.
In the passage, quotations from writers about nihilism are used in order to:
I. summarize specific points made in the course of the passage.
II. contrast points of view on the subject under discussion.
III. make transitions between points in the discussion.

Although nihilism is commonly defined as a form of extremist political thought, the term has a broader meaning. Nihilism is in fact a complex intellectual stance with venerable roots in the history of ideas, which forms the theoretical basis for many positive assertions of modern thought. Its essence is the systematic negation of all perceptual orders and assumptions. A complete view must account for the influence of two historical crosscurrents: philosophical skepticism about the ultimacy of any truth, and the mystical quest for that same pure truth. These are united by their categorical rejection of the ג€knownג€.
The outstanding representative of the former current, David Hume (1711-1776), maintained that external reality is unknowable, since sense impressions are actually part of the contents of the mind. Their presumed correspondence to external ג€thingsג€ cannot be verified, since it can be checked only by other sense impressions. Hume further asserts that all abstract conceptions turn out, on examination, to be generalizations from sense impressions. He concludes that even such an apparently objective phenomenon as a cause-and-effect relationship between events may be no more than a subjective fabrication of the observer.
Stanley Rosen notes: ג€Hume terminates in skepticism because he finds nothing within the subject but individual impressions and ideas.ג€
For mystics of every faith, the ג€experience of nothingnessג€ is the goal of spiritual practice. Buddhist meditation techniques involve the systematic negation of all spiritual and intellectual constructs to make way for the apprehension of pure truth. St. John of the Cross similarly rejected every physical and mental symbolization of God as illusory. St. Johnג€™s spiritual legacy is, as Michael Novak puts it, ג€the constant return to inner solitude, an unbroken awareness of the emptiness at the heart of consciousness. It is a harsh refusal to allow idols to be placed in the sanctuary. It requires also a scorching gaze upon all the bureaucracies, institutions, manipulators, and hucksters who employ technology and its supposed realities to bewitch and bedazzle the psycheג€.
Novakג€™s interpretation points to the way these philosophical and mystical traditions prepared the ground for the political nihilism of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The rejection of existing social institutions and their claims to authority is in the most basic sense made possible by Humean skepticism. The political nihilism of the Russian intelligentsia combined this radical skepticism with a near mystical faith in the power of a new beginning. Hence, their desire to destroy becomes a revolutionary affirmation; in the words of Stanley Rosen, ג€Nihilism is an attempt to overcome or repudiate the past on behalf of an unknown and unknowable, yet hoped-for, future.ג€ This fusion of skepticism and mystical re-creation can be traced in contemporary thought, for example as an element in the counterculture of the 1960s.
Which of the following is a necessary assumption underlying Humeג€™s conclusion that external reality is unknowable, as discussed in the passage?

Although nihilism is commonly defined as a form of extremist political thought, the term has a broader meaning. Nihilism is in fact a complex intellectual stance with venerable roots in the history of ideas, which forms the theoretical basis for many positive assertions of modern thought. Its essence is the systematic negation of all perceptual orders and assumptions. A complete view must account for the influence of two historical crosscurrents: philosophical skepticism about the ultimacy of any truth, and the mystical quest for that same pure truth. These are united by their categorical rejection of the ג€knownג€.
The outstanding representative of the former current, David Hume (1711-1776), maintained that external reality is unknowable, since sense impressions are actually part of the contents of the mind. Their presumed correspondence to external ג€thingsג€ cannot be verified, since it can be checked only by other sense impressions. Hume further asserts that all abstract conceptions turn out, on examination, to be generalizations from sense impressions. He concludes that even such an apparently objective phenomenon as a cause-and-effect relationship between events may be no more than a subjective fabrication of the observer.
Stanley Rosen notes: ג€Hume terminates in skepticism because he finds nothing within the subject but individual impressions and ideasג€.
For mystics of every faith, the ג€experience of nothingnessג€ is the goal of spiritual practice. Buddhist meditation techniques involve the systematic negation of all spiritual and intellectual constructs to make way for the apprehension of pure truth. St. John of the Cross similarly rejected every physical and mental symbolization of God as illusory. St. Johnג€™s spiritual legacy is, as Michael Novak puts it, ג€the constant return to inner solitude, an unbroken awareness of the emptiness at the heart of consciousness. It is a harsh refusal to allow idols to be placed in the sanctuary. It requires also a scorching gaze upon all the bureaucracies, institutions, manipulators, and hucksters who employ technology and its supposed realities to bewitch and bedazzle the psycheג€.
Novakג€™s interpretation points to the way these philosophical and mystical traditions prepared the ground for the political nihilism of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The rejection of existing social institutions and their claims to authority is in the most basic sense made possible by Humean skepticism. The political nihilism of the Russian intelligentsia combined this radical skepticism with a near mystical faith in the power of a new beginning. Hence, their desire to destroy becomes a revolutionary affirmation; in the words of Stanley Rosen, ג€Nihilism is an attempt to overcome or repudiate the past on behalf of an unknown and unknowable, yet hoped-for, future.ג€ This fusion of skepticism and mystical re-creation can be traced in contemporary thought, for example as an element in the counterculture of the 1960s.
Novakג€™s interpretation of St. Johnג€™s spiritual legacy (lines 31-38) is important to the authorג€™s argument primarily because it:

Although nihilism is commonly defined as a form of extremist political thought, the term has a broader meaning. Nihilism is in fact a complex intellectual stance with venerable roots in the history of ideas, which forms the theoretical basis for many positive assertions of modern thought. Its essence is the systematic negation of all perceptual orders and assumptions. A complete view must account for the influence of two historical crosscurrents: philosophical skepticism about the ultimacy of any truth, and the mystical quest for that same pure truth. These are united by their categorical rejection of the ג€knownג€.
The outstanding representative of the former current, David Hume (1711-1776), maintained that external reality is unknowable, since sense impressions are actually part of the contents of the mind. Their presumed correspondence to external ג€thingsג€ cannot be verified, since it can be checked only by other sense impressions. Hume further asserts that all abstract conceptions turn out, on examination, to be generalizations from sense impressions. He concludes that even such an apparently objective phenomenon as a cause-and-effect relationship between events may be no more than a subjective fabrication of the observer.
Stanley Rosen notes: ג€Hume terminates in skepticism because he finds nothing within the subject but individual impressions and ideasג€.
For mystics of every faith, the ג€experience of nothingnessג€ is the goal of spiritual practice. Buddhist meditation techniques involve the systematic negation of all spiritual and intellectual constructs to make way for the apprehension of pure truth. St. John of the Cross similarly rejected every physical and mental symbolization of God as illusory. St. Johnג€™s spiritual legacy is, as Michael Novak puts it, ג€the constant return to inner solitude, an unbroken awareness of the emptiness at the heart of consciousness. It is a harsh refusal to allow idols to be placed in the sanctuary. It requires also a scorching gaze upon all the bureaucracies, institutions, manipulators, and hucksters who employ technology and its supposed realities to bewitch and bedazzle the psycheג€.
Novakג€™s interpretation points to the way these philosophical and mystical traditions prepared the ground for the political nihilism of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The rejection of existing social institutions and their claims to authority is in the most basic sense made possible by Humean skepticism. The political nihilism of the Russian intelligentsia combined this radical skepticism with a near mystical faith in the power of a new beginning. Hence, their desire to destroy becomes a revolutionary affirmation; in the words of Stanley Rosen, ג€Nihilism is an attempt to overcome or repudiate the past on behalf of an unknown and unknowable, yet hoped-for, future.ג€ This fusion of skepticism and mystical re-creation can be traced in contemporary thought, for example as an element in the counterculture of the 1960s.
The author uses all of the following techniques in developing the topic EXCEPT:

Although nihilism is commonly defined as a form of extremist political thought, the term has a broader meaning. Nihilism is in fact a complex intellectual stance with venerable roots in the history of ideas, which forms the theoretical basis for many positive assertions of modern thought. Its essence is the systematic negation of all perceptual orders and assumptions. A complete view must account for the influence of two historical crosscurrents: philosophical skepticism about the ultimacy of any truth, and the mystical quest for that same pure truth. These are united by their categorical rejection of the ג€knownג€.
The outstanding representative of the former current, David Hume (1711-1776), maintained that external reality is unknowable, since sense impressions are actually part of the contents of the mind. Their presumed correspondence to external ג€thingsג€ cannot be verified, since it can be checked only by other sense impressions. Hume further asserts that all abstract conceptions turn out, on examination, to be generalizations from sense impressions. He concludes that even such an apparently objective phenomenon as a cause-and-effect relationship between events may be no more than a subjective fabrication of the observer.
Stanley Rosen notes: ג€Hume terminates in skepticism because he finds nothing within the subject but individual impressions and ideasג€.
For mystics of every faith, the ג€experience of nothingnessג€ is the goal of spiritual practice. Buddhist meditation techniques involve the systematic negation of all spiritual and intellectual constructs to make way for the apprehension of pure truth. St. John of the Cross similarly rejected every physical and mental symbolization of God as illusory. St. Johnג€™s spiritual legacy is, as Michael Novak puts it, ג€the constant return to inner solitude, an unbroken awareness of the emptiness at the heart of consciousness. It is a harsh refusal to allow idols to be placed in the sanctuary. It requires also a scorching gaze upon all the bureaucracies, institutions, manipulators, and hucksters who employ technology and its supposed realities to bewitch and bedazzle the psycheג€.
Novakג€™s interpretation points to the way these philosophical and mystical traditions prepared the ground for the political nihilism of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The rejection of existing social institutions and their claims to authority is in the most basic sense made possible by Humean skepticism. The political nihilism of the Russian intelligentsia combined this radical skepticism with a near mystical faith in the power of a new beginning. Hence, their desire to destroy becomes a revolutionary affirmation; in the words of Stanley Rosen, ג€Nihilism is an attempt to overcome or repudiate the past on behalf of an unknown and unknowable, yet hoped-for, future.ג€ This fusion of skepticism and mystical re-creation can be traced in contemporary thought, for example as an element in the counterculture of the 1960s.
In the last paragraph, the author quotes Stanley Rosen in order to make the point that modern nihilism is:

Although nihilism is commonly defined as a form of extremist political thought, the term has a broader meaning. Nihilism is in fact a complex intellectual stance with venerable roots in the history of ideas, which forms the theoretical basis for many positive assertions of modern thought. Its essence is the systematic negation of all perceptual orders and assumptions. A complete view must account for the influence of two historical crosscurrents: philosophical skepticism about the ultimacy of any truth, and the mystical quest for that same pure truth. These are united by their categorical rejection of the ג€knownג€.
The outstanding representative of the former current, David Hume (1711-1776), maintained that external reality is unknowable, since sense impressions are actually part of the contents of the mind. Their presumed correspondence to external ג€thingsג€ cannot be verified, since it can be checked only by other sense impressions. Hume further asserts that all abstract conceptions turn out, on examination, to be generalizations from sense impressions. He concludes that even such an apparently objective phenomenon as a cause-and-effect relationship between events may be no more than a subjective fabrication of the observer.
Stanley Rosen notes: ג€Hume terminates in skepticism because he finds nothing within the subject but individual impressions and ideasג€.
For mystics of every faith, the ג€experience of nothingnessג€ is the goal of spiritual practice. Buddhist meditation techniques involve the systematic negation of all spiritual and intellectual constructs to make way for the apprehension of pure truth. St. John of the Cross similarly rejected every physical and mental symbolization of God as illusory. St. Johnג€™s spiritual legacy is, as Michael Novak puts it, ג€the constant return to inner solitude, an unbroken awareness of the emptiness at the heart of consciousness. It is a harsh refusal to allow idols to be placed in the sanctuary. It requires also a scorching gaze upon all the bureaucracies, institutions, manipulators, and hucksters who employ technology and its supposed realities to bewitch and bedazzle the psycheג€.
Novakג€™s interpretation points to the way these philosophical and mystical traditions prepared the ground for the political nihilism of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. The rejection of existing social institutions and their claims to authority is in the most basic sense made possible by Humean skepticism. The political nihilism of the Russian intelligentsia combined this radical skepticism with a near mystical faith in the power of a new beginning. Hence, their desire to destroy becomes a revolutionary affirmation; in the words of Stanley Rosen, ג€Nihilism is an attempt to overcome or repudiate the past on behalf of an unknown and unknowable, yet hoped-for, future.ג€ This fusion of skepticism and mystical re-creation can be traced in contemporary thought, for example as an element in the counterculture of the 1960s.
Which of the following provides the best continuation for the final paragraph of the passage?

Agonistic behavior, or aggression, is exhibited by most of the more than three million species of animals on this planet. Animal behaviorists still disagree on a comprehensive definition of the term, but aggressive behavior can be loosely described as any action that harms an adversary or compels it to retreat. Aggression may serve many purposes, such as food gathering, establishing territory, and enforcing social hierarchy. In a general Darwinian sense, however, the purpose of aggressive behavior is to increase the individual animalג€™s ג€" and thus, the speciesג€™ ג€" chance of survival.
Aggressive behavior may be directed at animals of other species, or it may be conspecific ג€" that is, directed at members of an animalג€™s own species. One of the most common examples of conspecific aggression occurs in the establishment and maintenance of social hierarchies. In a hierarchy, social dominance is usually established according to physical superiority; the classic example is that of a pecking order among domestic fowl. The dominance hierarchy may be viewed as a means of social control that reduces the incidence of attack within a group. Once established, the hierarchy is rarely threatened by disputes because the inferior animal immediately submits when confronted by a superior.
Two basic types of aggressive behavior are common to most species: attack and defensive threat. Each type involves a particular pattern of physiological and behavioral responses, which tends not to vary regardless of the stimulus that provokes it. For example, the pattern of attack behavior in cats involves a series of movements, such as stalking, biting, seizing with the forepaws and scratching with the hind legs, that changes very little regardless of the stimulus ג€" that is, regardless of who or what the cat is attacking.
The catג€™s defensive threat response offers another set of closely linked physiological and behavioral patterns. The cardiovascular system begins to pump blood at a faster rate, in preparation for sudden physical activity. The eyes narrow and the ears flatten against the side of the catג€™s head for protection, and other vulnerable areas of the body such as the stomach and throat are similarly contracted. Growling or hissing noises and erect fur also signal defensive threat. As with the attack response, this pattern of responses is generated with little variation regardless of the nature of the stimulus.
Are these aggressive patterns of attack and defensive threat innate, genetically programmed, or are they learned? The answer seems to be a combination of both.
A mouse is helpless at birth, but by its 12th day of life can assume a defensive threat position by backing up on its hind legs. By the time it is one month old, the mouse begins to exhibit the attack response. Nonetheless, copious evidence suggests that animals learn and practice aggressive behavior; one need look no further than the sight of a kitten playing with a ball of string. All the elements of attack ג€" stalking, pouncing, biting and shaking ג€" are part of the game which prepares the kitten for more serious situations later in life.
The passage asserts that animal social hierarchies are generally stable because:

Agonistic behavior, or aggression, is exhibited by most of the more than three million species of animals on this planet. Animal behaviorists still disagree on a comprehensive definition of the term, but aggressive behavior can be loosely described as any action that harms an adversary or compels it to retreat. Aggression may serve many purposes, such as food gathering, establishing territory, and enforcing social hierarchy. In a general Darwinian sense, however, the purpose of aggressive behavior is to increase the individual animalג€™s ג€" and thus, the speciesג€™ ג€" chance of survival.
Aggressive behavior may be directed at animals of other species, or it may be conspecific ג€" that is, directed at members of an animalג€™s own species. One of the most common examples of conspecific aggression occurs in the establishment and maintenance of social hierarchies. In a hierarchy, social dominance is usually established according to physical superiority; the classic example is that of a pecking order among domestic fowl. The dominance hierarchy may be viewed as a means of social control that reduces the incidence of attack within a group. Once established, the hierarchy is rarely threatened by disputes because the inferior animal immediately submits when confronted by a superior.
Two basic types of aggressive behavior are common to most species: attack and defensive threat. Each type involves a particular pattern of physiological and behavioral responses, which tends not to vary regardless of the stimulus that provokes it. For example, the pattern of attack behavior in cats involves a series of movements, such as stalking, biting, seizing with the forepaws and scratching with the hind legs, that changes very little regardless of the stimulus ג€" that is, regardless of who or what the cat is attacking.
The catג€™s defensive threat response offers another set of closely linked physiological and behavioral patterns. The cardiovascular system begins to pump blood at a faster rate, in preparation for sudden physical activity. The eyes narrow and the ears flatten against the side of the catג€™s head for protection, and other vulnerable areas of the body such as the stomach and throat are similarly contracted. Growling or hissing noises and erect fur also signal defensive threat. As with the attack response, this pattern of responses is generated with little variation regardless of the nature of the stimulus.
Are these aggressive patterns of attack and defensive threat innate, genetically programmed, or are they learned? The answer seems to be a combination of both.
A mouse is helpless at birth, but by its 12th day of life can assume a defensive threat position by backing up on its hind legs. By the time it is one month old, the mouse begins to exhibit the attack response. Nonetheless, copious evidence suggests that animals learn and practice aggressive behavior; one need look no further than the sight of a kitten playing with a ball of string. All the elements of attack ג€" stalking, pouncing, biting and shaking ג€" are part of the game which prepares the kitten for more serious situations later in life.
According to the author, what is the most significant physiological change undergone by a cat assuming the defensive threat position?

Agonistic behavior, or aggression, is exhibited by most of the more than three million species of animals on this planet. Animal behaviorists still disagree on a comprehensive definition of the term, but aggressive behavior can be loosely described as any action that harms an adversary or compels it to retreat. Aggression may serve many purposes, such as food gathering, establishing territory, and enforcing social hierarchy. In a general Darwinian sense, however, the purpose of aggressive behavior is to increase the individual animalג€™s ג€" and thus, the speciesג€™ ג€" chance of survival.
Aggressive behavior may be directed at animals of other species, or it may be conspecific ג€" that is, directed at members of an animalג€™s own species. One of the most common examples of conspecific aggression occurs in the establishment and maintenance of social hierarchies. In a hierarchy, social dominance is usually established according to physical superiority; the classic example is that of a pecking order among domestic fowl. The dominance hierarchy may be viewed as a means of social control that reduces the incidence of attack within a group. Once established, the hierarchy is rarely threatened by disputes because the inferior animal immediately submits when confronted by a superior.
Two basic types of aggressive behavior are common to most species: attack and defensive threat. Each type involves a particular pattern of physiological and behavioral responses, which tends not to vary regardless of the stimulus that provokes it. For example, the pattern of attack behavior in cats involves a series of movements, such as stalking, biting, seizing with the forepaws and scratching with the hind legs, that changes very little regardless of the stimulus ג€" that is, regardless of who or what the cat is attacking.
The catג€™s defensive threat response offers another set of closely linked physiological and behavioral patterns. The cardiovascular system begins to pump blood at a faster rate, in preparation for sudden physical activity. The eyes narrow and the ears flatten against the side of the catג€™s head for protection, and other vulnerable areas of the body such as the stomach and throat are similarly contracted. Growling or hissing noises and erect fur also signal defensive threat. As with the attack response, this pattern of responses is generated with little variation regardless of the nature of the stimulus.
Are these aggressive patterns of attack and defensive threat innate, genetically programmed, or are they learned? The answer seems to be a combination of both.
A mouse is helpless at birth, but by its 12th day of life can assume a defensive threat position by backing up on its hind legs. By the time it is one month old, the mouse begins to exhibit the attack response. Nonetheless, copious evidence suggests that animals learn and practice aggressive behavior; one need look no further than the sight of a kitten playing with a ball of string. All the elements of attack ג€" stalking, pouncing, biting and shaking ג€" are part of the game which prepares the kitten for more serious situations later in life.
Based on the information in the passage about agonistic behavior, it is reasonable to conclude that:
I. the purpose of agonistic behavior is to help insure the survival of the species.
II. agonistic behavior is both innate and learned.
III. conspecific aggression is more frequent than interspecies aggression.

Agonistic behavior, or aggression, is exhibited by most of the more than three million species of animals on this planet. Animal behaviorists still disagree on a comprehensive definition of the term, but aggressive behavior can be loosely described as any action that harms an adversary or compels it to retreat. Aggression may serve many purposes, such as food gathering, establishing territory, and enforcing social hierarchy. In a general Darwinian sense, however, the purpose of aggressive behavior is to increase the individual animalג€™s ג€" and thus, the speciesג€™ ג€" chance of survival.
Aggressive behavior may be directed at animals of other species, or it may be conspecific ג€" that is, directed at members of an animalג€™s own species. One of the most common examples of conspecific aggression occurs in the establishment and maintenance of social hierarchies. In a hierarchy, social dominance is usually established according to physical superiority; the classic example is that of a pecking order among domestic fowl. The dominance hierarchy may be viewed as a means of social control that reduces the incidence of attack within a group. Once established, the hierarchy is rarely threatened by disputes because the inferior animal immediately submits when confronted by a superior.
Two basic types of aggressive behavior are common to most species: attack and defensive threat. Each type involves a particular pattern of physiological and behavioral responses, which tends not to vary regardless of the stimulus that provokes it. For example, the pattern of attack behavior in cats involves a series of movements, such as stalking, biting, seizing with the forepaws and scratching with the hind legs, that changes very little regardless of the stimulus ג€" that is, regardless of who or what the cat is attacking.
The catג€™s defensive threat response offers another set of closely linked physiological and behavioral patterns. The cardiovascular system begins to pump blood at a faster rate, in preparation for sudden physical activity. The eyes narrow and the ears flatten against the side of the catג€™s head for protection, and other vulnerable areas of the body such as the stomach and throat are similarly contracted. Growling or hissing noises and erect fur also signal defensive threat. As with the attack response, this pattern of responses is generated with little variation regardless of the nature of the stimulus.
Are these aggressive patterns of attack and defensive threat innate, genetically programmed, or are they learned? The answer seems to be a combination of both.
A mouse is helpless at birth, but by its 12th day of life can assume a defensive threat position by backing up on its hind legs. By the time it is one month old, the mouse begins to exhibit the attack response. Nonetheless, copious evidence suggests that animals learn and practice aggressive behavior; one need look no further than the sight of a kitten playing with a ball of string. All the elements of attack ג€" stalking, pouncing, biting and shaking ג€" are part of the game which prepares the kitten for more serious situations later in life.
The author suggests that the question of whether agonistic behavior is genetically programmed or learned:

Agonistic behavior, or aggression, is exhibited by most of the more than three million species of animals on this planet. Animal behaviorists still disagree on a comprehensive definition of the term, but aggressive behavior can be loosely described as any action that harms an adversary or compels it to retreat. Aggression may serve many purposes, such as food gathering, establishing territory, and enforcing social hierarchy. In a general Darwinian sense, however, the purpose of aggressive behavior is to increase the individual animalג€™s ג€" and thus, the speciesג€™ ג€" chance of survival.
Aggressive behavior may be directed at animals of other species, or it may be conspecific ג€" that is, directed at members of an animalג€™s own species. One of the most common examples of conspecific aggression occurs in the establishment and maintenance of social hierarchies. In a hierarchy, social dominance is usually established according to physical superiority; the classic example is that of a pecking order among domestic fowl. The dominance hierarchy may be viewed as a means of social control that reduces the incidence of attack within a group. Once established, the hierarchy is rarely threatened by disputes because the inferior animal immediately submits when confronted by a superior.
Two basic types of aggressive behavior are common to most species: attack and defensive threat. Each type involves a particular pattern of physiological and behavioral responses, which tends not to vary regardless of the stimulus that provokes it. For example, the pattern of attack behavior in cats involves a series of movements, such as stalking, biting, seizing with the forepaws and scratching with the hind legs, that changes very little regardless of the stimulus ג€" that is, regardless of who or what the cat is attacking.
The catג€™s defensive threat response offers another set of closely linked physiological and behavioral patterns. The cardiovascular system begins to pump blood at a faster rate, in preparation for sudden physical activity. The eyes narrow and the ears flatten against the side of the catג€™s head for protection, and other vulnerable areas of the body such as the stomach and throat are similarly contracted. Growling or hissing noises and erect fur also signal defensive threat. As with the attack response, this pattern of responses is generated with little variation regardless of the nature of the stimulus.
Are these aggressive patterns of attack and defensive threat innate, genetically programmed, or are they learned? The answer seems to be a combination of both.
A mouse is helpless at birth, but by its 12th day of life can assume a defensive threat position by backing up on its hind legs. By the time it is one month old, the mouse begins to exhibit the attack response. Nonetheless, copious evidence suggests that animals learn and practice aggressive behavior; one need look no further than the sight of a kitten playing with a ball of string. All the elements of attack ג€" stalking, pouncing, biting and shaking ג€" are part of the game which prepares the kitten for more serious situations later in life.
Which of the following topics related to agonistic behavior is NOT explicitly addressed in the passage?

Agonistic behavior, or aggression, is exhibited by most of the more than three million species of animals on this planet. Animal behaviorists still disagree on a comprehensive definition of the term, but aggressive behavior can be loosely described as any action that harms an adversary or compels it to retreat. Aggression may serve many purposes, such as food gathering, establishing territory, and enforcing social hierarchy. In a general Darwinian sense, however, the purpose of aggressive behavior is to increase the individual animalג€™s ג€" and thus, the speciesג€™ ג€" chance of survival.
Aggressive behavior may be directed at animals of other species, or it may be conspecific ג€" that is, directed at members of an animalג€™s own species. One of the most common examples of conspecific aggression occurs in the establishment and maintenance of social hierarchies. In a hierarchy, social dominance is usually established according to physical superiority; the classic example is that of a pecking order among domestic fowl. The dominance hierarchy may be viewed as a means of social control that reduces the incidence of attack within a group. Once established, the hierarchy is rarely threatened by disputes because the inferior animal immediately submits when confronted by a superior.
Two basic types of aggressive behavior are common to most species: attack and defensive threat. Each type involves a particular pattern of physiological and behavioral responses, which tends not to vary regardless of the stimulus that provokes it. For example, the pattern of attack behavior in cats involves a series of movements, such as stalking, biting, seizing with the forepaws and scratching with the hind legs, that changes very little regardless of the stimulus ג€" that is, regardless of who or what the cat is attacking.
The catג€™s defensive threat response offers another set of closely linked physiological and behavioral patterns. The cardiovascular system begins to pump blood at a faster rate, in preparation for sudden physical activity. The eyes narrow and the ears flatten against the side of the catג€™s head for protection, and other vulnerable areas of the body such as the stomach and throat are similarly contracted. Growling or hissing noises and erect fur also signal defensive threat. As with the attack response, this pattern of responses is generated with little variation regardless of the nature of the stimulus.
Are these aggressive patterns of attack and defensive threat innate, genetically programmed, or are they learned? The answer seems to be a combination of both.
A mouse is helpless at birth, but by its 12th day of life can assume a defensive threat position by backing up on its hind legs. By the time it is one month old, the mouse begins to exhibit the attack response. Nonetheless, copious evidence suggests that animals learn and practice aggressive behavior; one need look no further than the sight of a kitten playing with a ball of string. All the elements of attack ג€" stalking, pouncing, biting and shaking ג€" are part of the game which prepares the kitten for more serious situations later in life.
Which of the following would be most in accord with the information presented in the passage?

At a recent meeting of the American Public Transit Association, the Environmental Protection Agency unveiled stringent new standards for pollution control. The transit authorities were particularly concerned about the implementation of a proposed ג€Clean Air Act.ג€ They believed the provisions of the Clean Air Act could severely affect basic services to their local communities. Many transit agencies were concerned that it would be difficult to comply with the pollution and emissions control standards while continuing to operate within realistic budgets.
The aim of the Clean Air Act is to assure that by the year 2000, there will be a reduction of at least 10 million tons of sulfur dioxide from 1980 levels. The bill also calls for a reduction in pollutants that contribute to the depletion of ozone. Strict regulations of toxic air emissions would have to be established and enforced.
Additionally, the Clean Air Act would establish specific acid-rain reduction quotas and enforce severe penalties for transgressors of any of the new clean air regulations.
There is little doubt that mass-transit suppliers will be considerably affected by this new legislation, just as the chemical and petroleum industries have already been affected by similar legislation. Transit authorities are challenged to strike a difficult balance between complying with the governmentג€™s new standards and developing an official concern for the environment, while continuing to fulfill the transportation needs of the general population.
Among the areas addressed by the Clean Air Act, the topic of mobile resources is of particular interest to mass transit authorities. Provisions contained in the Act under this title are aimed at encouraging the development and practical use of alternative fuel sources, like solar energy and methane fuel. The goal of this section of the Act is to eradicate toxic fuel emissions in order to provide cleaner air and a more favorable environment. The Act even goes so far as to declare that in cities like New York, Los Angeles and Houston ג€" where air quality is particularly noxious and toxins exceed the limits of federal regulations ג€" forms of mass transit should run on so-called ג€clean-burning fuelsג€ by the year 2000. Such fuels include reformulated gasoline, propane, electricity, natural gas, ethanol, methanol, or any similar type of low-emission fuel. In addition, the Act proposes that, by 1994, all new urban buses in cities with populations exceeding one million must operate solely on clean-burning fuels.
The topics of alternative fuels and alternative fuel vehicles represent, by far, the most controversial issue in the Clean Air Act. President Bush has called alternative fuels ג€bold and innovativeג€ means to control pollution, but according to many transportation experts, the Actג€™s proposals on alternative fuel usage are unrealistic. The transit authorities recognize that concern for the environment and health hazards like pollution are global issues. However, most transit officials concur that inventing and developing new ways to fuel mass transit will take at least 50 years to realize. They point out that the Act does not mention the political and social ramifications of usurping the role of the petroleum industries. The Act does not mention if or how the thousands of people employed by the oil industry will get retrained to produce and implement the use of ג€cleanג€ fuel.
No one disputes the fact that people need some form of transportation to get from place to place. Preserving the environment should be a priority, yet we need to remember that even if toxic emissions are completely eliminated sometime in the future, the challenge of moving mass numbers of people where they want to go will still exist and must remain a priority. Transit authorities contend that unless the Clean Air Act also acknowledges this, and develops a way to encourage mass transit over personal transportation, the problems of pollution might not be significantly altered. They suggest that there are many areas in this country that have little or no mass transit and that, if the Clean Air Actג€™s goal is to reduce pollution, perhaps the most practical and realistic means to achieve that goal is to encourage the development and maintenance of mass transit systems.
In general, transit authorities feel that complying with the provisions in the Clean Air Act will:

At a recent meeting of the American Public Transit Association, the Environmental Protection Agency unveiled stringent new standards for pollution control. The transit authorities were particularly concerned about the implementation of a proposed ג€Clean Air Act.ג€ They believed the provisions of the Clean Air Act could severely affect basic services to their local communities. Many transit agencies were concerned that it would be difficult to comply with the pollution and emissions control standards while continuing to operate within realistic budgets.
The aim of the Clean Air Act is to assure that by the year 2000, there will be a reduction of at least 10 million tons of sulfur dioxide from 1980 levels. The bill also calls for a reduction in pollutants that contribute to the depletion of ozone. Strict regulations of toxic air emissions would have to be established and enforced.
Additionally, the Clean Air Act would establish specific acid-rain reduction quotas and enforce severe penalties for transgressors of any of the new clean air regulations.
There is little doubt that mass-transit suppliers will be considerably affected by this new legislation, just as the chemical and petroleum industries have already been affected by similar legislation. Transit authorities are challenged to strike a difficult balance between complying with the governmentג€™s new standards and developing an official concern for the environment, while continuing to fulfill the transportation needs of the general population.
Among the areas addressed by the Clean Air Act, the topic of mobile resources is of particular interest to mass transit authorities. Provisions contained in the Act under this title are aimed at encouraging the development and practical use of alternative fuel sources, like solar energy and methane fuel. The goal of this section of the Act is to eradicate toxic fuel emissions in order to provide cleaner air and a more favorable environment. The Act even goes so far as to declare that in cities like New York, Los Angeles and Houston ג€" where air quality is particularly noxious and toxins exceed the limits of federal regulations ג€" forms of mass transit should run on so-called ג€clean-burning fuelsג€ by the year 2000. Such fuels include reformulated gasoline, propane, electricity, natural gas, ethanol, methanol, or any similar type of low-emission fuel. In addition, the Act proposes that, by 1994, all new urban buses in cities with populations exceeding one million must operate solely on clean-burning fuels.
The topics of alternative fuels and alternative fuel vehicles represent, by far, the most controversial issue in the Clean Air Act. President Bush has called alternative fuels ג€bold and innovativeג€ means to control pollution, but according to many transportation experts, the Actג€™s proposals on alternative fuel usage are unrealistic. The transit authorities recognize that concern for the environment and health hazards like pollution are global issues. However, most transit officials concur that inventing and developing new ways to fuel mass transit will take at least 50 years to realize. They point out that the Act does not mention the political and social ramifications of usurping the role of the petroleum industries. The Act does not mention if or how the thousands of people employed by the oil industry will get retrained to produce and implement the use of ג€cleanג€ fuel.
No one disputes the fact that people need some form of transportation to get from place to place. Preserving the environment should be a priority, yet we need to remember that even if toxic emissions are completely eliminated sometime in the future, the challenge of moving mass numbers of people where they want to go will still exist and must remain a priority. Transit authorities contend that unless the Clean Air Act also acknowledges this, and develops a way to encourage mass transit over personal transportation, the problems of pollution might not be significantly altered. They suggest that there are many areas in this country that have little or no mass transit and that, if the Clean Air Actג€™s goal is to reduce pollution, perhaps the most practical and realistic means to achieve that goal is to encourage the development and maintenance of mass transit systems.
According to transit authorities, unless the Clean Air Act acknowledges the necessity for mass transit, and encourages its use over that of personal transportation: