Q9 - Red butterflies

[muriella]

Hi Manhattan Geeks - Was able to get the right answer here but only after poe. When I first saw (A), this was my thought process:

How does havng “no” poisonous butterflies with irregular flight styles strengthen the idea that nonpoisonous butterflies adopt this style to elude predators. For ex, if, say, even just one poisonous buterrflies species had an irregular flight style, and a nonpoisonous butterfly adopted that same irreg flight style, wouldn’t this, in a way, help the nonpoisonous elude predators because the predators might just mistake him for the other poisonous ones who fly in the same manner??

Could a Manhattan geek please correct the process here?

Thanks in advance.

[hamham]

I thought (A) weakened the argument, because red admiral developed the irregular fashion to elude predators. And I assumed this is because they are copying poisonous butterfly so they can avoid predators. So when I read (A), I thought it weakened since the flight style differ between poisonous butterfly and red admiral. Can anyone help me with this?

[ohthatpatrick]

Question Type: Strengthen

We also know from looking at the question stem that we're strengthening a hypothesis, which means we're reading a CAUSAL EXPLANATION type argument.

With CAUSAL EXPLANATIONS, there are two pressure points to attack on any Assumption Family question:
1. Plausibility of author's explanation
2. Other potential ways to explain the evidence

Why do red admirals fly in a weird way?
HYPOTHESIS - it's to avoid predators

#1 ideas -
- DOES the weird flight pattern actually give predators trouble? i.e. is it much harder to catch a butterfly if it flies in a highly irregular fashion?
- Do butterflies without flying predators tend to not have weird flying patterns? (no cause, no effect)

#2 ideas -
- Is the weird flight pattern a mating dance?
- Is it a way of sneaking up on prey?
- Is it a way to create body heat?

===============

(A) This a weird variation on "no cause, no effect".
For red admirals, the CAUSE was "need a defense against predators", the EFFECT was "irregular flying style".

So the poisonous butterflies do NOT need a defense against predators (they already have their poison for that), and so they do NOT exhibit irregular flying style.

If the irregular flying pattern were more connected to mating, sneaking up on prey, creating body heat, etc. ... then we would expect other butterflies (including poisonous ones) to also have the irregular flying pattern in their repertoire.

If poisonous butterflies have no need for irregular flying, then irregular flying is probably not being used for something like food / procreation / internal regulation.

== incorrect answers ==

(B) This has no effect on judging whether irregular flying is an adaptation against predators. Predators could easily be the 2nd most common cause of death and still merit an evolutionary strategy.

(C) This doesn't work for or against the hypothesis unless we can connect flight style to "means of avoiding predators".

(D) If anything, this works against the hypothesis. The hypothesis is thinking, "this flight style costs precious body energy --- why would it be worth it? Must be to avoid predators."

This answer makes it sound more like, "Eh ... it doesn't cost THAT much precious energy"

(E) This doesn't do anything to connect or explain "irregular flying" + "means of avoiding predators".


Correct answer is (A).