PERT Reading Practice Test 5
Exam Summary
0 of 8 Questions completed
Questions:
Information
You have already completed the exam before. Hence you can not start it again.
Exam is loading…
You must sign in or sign up to start the exam.
You must first complete the following:
Results
Results
0 of 8 Questions answered correctly
Your time:
Time has elapsed
You have reached 0 of 0 point(s), (0)
Earned Point(s): 0 of 0, (0)
0 Essay(s) Pending (Possible Point(s): 0)
Average score |
|
Your score |
|
Categories
- Not categorized 0%
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- Current
- Review
- Answered
- Correct
- Incorrect
-
Question 1 of 8
1. Question
The following passage is from a discussion of various ways that living creatures have been classified over the years.
The world can be classified in different ways,
depending on one’s interests and principles of clas-
sification. The classifications (also known as
Line
taxonomies) in turn determine which comparisons
5
seem natural or unnatural, which literal or analog-
ical. For example, it has been common to classify
living creatures into three distinct groups—plants,
animals, and humans. According to this classifica-
tion, human beings are not a special kind of
10
animal, nor animals a special kind of plant. Thus
any comparisons between the three groups are
strictly analogical. Reasoning from inheritance in
garden peas to inheritance in fruit flies, and from
these two species to inheritance in human beings,
15
is sheer poetic metaphor.
Another mode of classifying living creatures is
commonly attributed to Aristotle. Instead of treat-
ing plants, animals, and humans as distinct
groups, they are nested. All living creatures
20
possess a vegetative soul that enables them to
grow and metabolize. Of these, some also have a
sensory soul that enables them to sense their envi-
ronments and move. One species also has a
rational soul that is capable of true understanding.
25
Thus, human beings are a special sort of animal,
and animals are a special sort of plant. Given this
classification, reasoning from human beings to all
other species with respect to the attributes of the
vegetative soul is legitimate, reasoning from
30
human beings to other animals with respect to the
attributes of the sensory soul is also legitimate,
but reasoning from the rational characteristics of
the human species to any other species is merely
analogical. According to both classifications, the
35
human species is unique. In the first, it has a king-
dom all to itself; in the second, it stands at the
pinnacle of the taxonomic hierarchy.
Homo sapiens is unique. All species are. But
this sort of uniqueness is not enough for many
40
(probably most) people, philosophers included. For
some reason, it is very important that the species
to which we belong be uniquely unique. It is of
utmost importance that the human species be
insulated from all other species with respect to
45
how we explain certain qualities. Human beings
clearly are capable of developing and learning
languages. For some reason, it is very important
that the waggle dance performed by bees * not
count as a genuine language. I have never been
50
able to understand why. I happen to think that the
waggle dance differs from human languages to
such a degree that little is gained by terming them
both “languages,” but even if “language” is so
defined that the waggle dance slips in, bees still
55
remain bees. It is equally important to some that
no other species use tools. No matter how inge-
nious other species get in the manipulation of
objects in their environment, it is absolutely
essential that nothing they do count as “tool use.”
60
I, however, fail to see what difference it makes
whether any of these devices such as probes and
anvils, etc. are really tools. All the species
involved remain distinct biological species no
matter what decisions are made. Similar observa-
65
tions hold for rationality and anything a computer
might do.
According to the author, what is most responsible for influencing our perception of a comparison between species?
CorrectIncorrect -
Question 2 of 8
2. Question
The following passage is from a discussion of various ways that living creatures have been classified over the years.
The world can be classified in different ways,
depending on one’s interests and principles of clas-
sification. The classifications (also known as
Line
taxonomies) in turn determine which comparisons
5
seem natural or unnatural, which literal or analog-
ical. For example, it has been common to classify
living creatures into three distinct groups—plants,
animals, and humans. According to this classifica-
tion, human beings are not a special kind of
10
animal, nor animals a special kind of plant. Thus
any comparisons between the three groups are
strictly analogical. Reasoning from inheritance in
garden peas to inheritance in fruit flies, and from
these two species to inheritance in human beings,
15
is sheer poetic metaphor.
Another mode of classifying living creatures is
commonly attributed to Aristotle. Instead of treat-
ing plants, animals, and humans as distinct
groups, they are nested. All living creatures
20
possess a vegetative soul that enables them to
grow and metabolize. Of these, some also have a
sensory soul that enables them to sense their envi-
ronments and move. One species also has a
rational soul that is capable of true understanding.
25
Thus, human beings are a special sort of animal,
and animals are a special sort of plant. Given this
classification, reasoning from human beings to all
other species with respect to the attributes of the
vegetative soul is legitimate, reasoning from
30
human beings to other animals with respect to the
attributes of the sensory soul is also legitimate,
but reasoning from the rational characteristics of
the human species to any other species is merely
analogical. According to both classifications, the
35
human species is unique. In the first, it has a king-
dom all to itself; in the second, it stands at the
pinnacle of the taxonomic hierarchy.
Homo sapiens is unique. All species are. But
this sort of uniqueness is not enough for many
40
(probably most) people, philosophers included. For
some reason, it is very important that the species
to which we belong be uniquely unique. It is of
utmost importance that the human species be
insulated from all other species with respect to
45
how we explain certain qualities. Human beings
clearly are capable of developing and learning
languages. For some reason, it is very important
that the waggle dance performed by bees * not
count as a genuine language. I have never been
50
able to understand why. I happen to think that the
waggle dance differs from human languages to
such a degree that little is gained by terming them
both “languages,” but even if “language” is so
defined that the waggle dance slips in, bees still
55
remain bees. It is equally important to some that
no other species use tools. No matter how inge-
nious other species get in the manipulation of
objects in their environment, it is absolutely
essential that nothing they do count as “tool use.”
60
I, however, fail to see what difference it makes
whether any of these devices such as probes and
anvils, etc. are really tools. All the species
involved remain distinct biological species no
matter what decisions are made. Similar observa-
65
tions hold for rationality and anything a computer
might do.
Which of the following is NOT possible within an Aristotelian classification scheme?
CorrectIncorrect -
Question 3 of 8
3. Question
The following passage is from a discussion of various ways that living creatures have been classified over the years.
The world can be classified in different ways,
depending on one’s interests and principles of clas-
sification. The classifications (also known as
Line
taxonomies) in turn determine which comparisons
5
seem natural or unnatural, which literal or analog-
ical. For example, it has been common to classify
living creatures into three distinct groups—plants,
animals, and humans. According to this classifica-
tion, human beings are not a special kind of
10
animal, nor animals a special kind of plant. Thus
any comparisons between the three groups are
strictly analogical. Reasoning from inheritance in
garden peas to inheritance in fruit flies, and from
these two species to inheritance in human beings,
15
is sheer poetic metaphor.
Another mode of classifying living creatures is
commonly attributed to Aristotle. Instead of treat-
ing plants, animals, and humans as distinct
groups, they are nested. All living creatures
20
possess a vegetative soul that enables them to
grow and metabolize. Of these, some also have a
sensory soul that enables them to sense their envi-
ronments and move. One species also has a
rational soul that is capable of true understanding.
25
Thus, human beings are a special sort of animal,
and animals are a special sort of plant. Given this
classification, reasoning from human beings to all
other species with respect to the attributes of the
vegetative soul is legitimate, reasoning from
30
human beings to other animals with respect to the
attributes of the sensory soul is also legitimate,
but reasoning from the rational characteristics of
the human species to any other species is merely
analogical. According to both classifications, the
35
human species is unique. In the first, it has a king-
dom all to itself; in the second, it stands at the
pinnacle of the taxonomic hierarchy.
Homo sapiens is unique. All species are. But
this sort of uniqueness is not enough for many
40
(probably most) people, philosophers included. For
some reason, it is very important that the species
to which we belong be uniquely unique. It is of
utmost importance that the human species be
insulated from all other species with respect to
45
how we explain certain qualities. Human beings
clearly are capable of developing and learning
languages. For some reason, it is very important
that the waggle dance performed by bees * not
count as a genuine language. I have never been
50
able to understand why. I happen to think that the
waggle dance differs from human languages to
such a degree that little is gained by terming them
both “languages,” but even if “language” is so
defined that the waggle dance slips in, bees still
55
remain bees. It is equally important to some that
no other species use tools. No matter how inge-
nious other species get in the manipulation of
objects in their environment, it is absolutely
essential that nothing they do count as “tool use.”
60
I, however, fail to see what difference it makes
whether any of these devices such as probes and
anvils, etc. are really tools. All the species
involved remain distinct biological species no
matter what decisions are made. Similar observa-
65
tions hold for rationality and anything a computer
might do.
Which of the following comparisons would be “legitimate” for all living organisms according to the Aristotelian scheme described in paragraph two?
I. Comparisons based on the vegetative soul
II. Comparisons based on the sensory soul
III. Comparisons based on the rational soulCorrectIncorrect -
Question 4 of 8
4. Question
The following passage is from a discussion of various ways that living creatures have been classified over the years.
The world can be classified in different ways,
depending on one’s interests and principles of clas-
sification. The classifications (also known as
Line
taxonomies) in turn determine which comparisons
5
seem natural or unnatural, which literal or analog-
ical. For example, it has been common to classify
living creatures into three distinct groups—plants,
animals, and humans. According to this classifica-
tion, human beings are not a special kind of
10
animal, nor animals a special kind of plant. Thus
any comparisons between the three groups are
strictly analogical. Reasoning from inheritance in
garden peas to inheritance in fruit flies, and from
these two species to inheritance in human beings,
15
is sheer poetic metaphor.
Another mode of classifying living creatures is
commonly attributed to Aristotle. Instead of treat-
ing plants, animals, and humans as distinct
groups, they are nested. All living creatures
20
possess a vegetative soul that enables them to
grow and metabolize. Of these, some also have a
sensory soul that enables them to sense their envi-
ronments and move. One species also has a
rational soul that is capable of true understanding.
25
Thus, human beings are a special sort of animal,
and animals are a special sort of plant. Given this
classification, reasoning from human beings to all
other species with respect to the attributes of the
vegetative soul is legitimate, reasoning from
30
human beings to other animals with respect to the
attributes of the sensory soul is also legitimate,
but reasoning from the rational characteristics of
the human species to any other species is merely
analogical. According to both classifications, the
35
human species is unique. In the first, it has a king-
dom all to itself; in the second, it stands at the
pinnacle of the taxonomic hierarchy.
Homo sapiens is unique. All species are. But
this sort of uniqueness is not enough for many
40
(probably most) people, philosophers included. For
some reason, it is very important that the species
to which we belong be uniquely unique. It is of
utmost importance that the human species be
insulated from all other species with respect to
45
how we explain certain qualities. Human beings
clearly are capable of developing and learning
languages. For some reason, it is very important
that the waggle dance performed by bees * not
count as a genuine language. I have never been
50
able to understand why. I happen to think that the
waggle dance differs from human languages to
such a degree that little is gained by terming them
both “languages,” but even if “language” is so
defined that the waggle dance slips in, bees still
55
remain bees. It is equally important to some that
no other species use tools. No matter how inge-
nious other species get in the manipulation of
objects in their environment, it is absolutely
essential that nothing they do count as “tool use.”
60
I, however, fail to see what difference it makes
whether any of these devices such as probes and
anvils, etc. are really tools. All the species
involved remain distinct biological species no
matter what decisions are made. Similar observa-
65
tions hold for rationality and anything a computer
might do.
If the author had wished to explain why “most” people (line 40) feel the way they do, the explanation would have probably focused on the
CorrectIncorrect -
Question 5 of 8
5. Question
The following passage is from a discussion of various ways that living creatures have been classified over the years.
The world can be classified in different ways,
depending on one’s interests and principles of clas-
sification. The classifications (also known as
Line
taxonomies) in turn determine which comparisons
5
seem natural or unnatural, which literal or analog-
ical. For example, it has been common to classify
living creatures into three distinct groups—plants,
animals, and humans. According to this classifica-
tion, human beings are not a special kind of
10
animal, nor animals a special kind of plant. Thus
any comparisons between the three groups are
strictly analogical. Reasoning from inheritance in
garden peas to inheritance in fruit flies, and from
these two species to inheritance in human beings,
15
is sheer poetic metaphor.
Another mode of classifying living creatures is
commonly attributed to Aristotle. Instead of treat-
ing plants, animals, and humans as distinct
groups, they are nested. All living creatures
20
possess a vegetative soul that enables them to
grow and metabolize. Of these, some also have a
sensory soul that enables them to sense their envi-
ronments and move. One species also has a
rational soul that is capable of true understanding.
25
Thus, human beings are a special sort of animal,
and animals are a special sort of plant. Given this
classification, reasoning from human beings to all
other species with respect to the attributes of the
vegetative soul is legitimate, reasoning from
30
human beings to other animals with respect to the
attributes of the sensory soul is also legitimate,
but reasoning from the rational characteristics of
the human species to any other species is merely
analogical. According to both classifications, the
35
human species is unique. In the first, it has a king-
dom all to itself; in the second, it stands at the
pinnacle of the taxonomic hierarchy.
Homo sapiens is unique. All species are. But
this sort of uniqueness is not enough for many
40
(probably most) people, philosophers included. For
some reason, it is very important that the species
to which we belong be uniquely unique. It is of
utmost importance that the human species be
insulated from all other species with respect to
45
how we explain certain qualities. Human beings
clearly are capable of developing and learning
languages. For some reason, it is very important
that the waggle dance performed by bees * not
count as a genuine language. I have never been
50
able to understand why. I happen to think that the
waggle dance differs from human languages to
such a degree that little is gained by terming them
both “languages,” but even if “language” is so
defined that the waggle dance slips in, bees still
55
remain bees. It is equally important to some that
no other species use tools. No matter how inge-
nious other species get in the manipulation of
objects in their environment, it is absolutely
essential that nothing they do count as “tool use.”
60
I, however, fail to see what difference it makes
whether any of these devices such as probes and
anvils, etc. are really tools. All the species
involved remain distinct biological species no
matter what decisions are made. Similar observa-
65
tions hold for rationality and anything a computer
might do.
The author uses the words “For some reason” in lines 40-41 to express
CorrectIncorrect -
Question 6 of 8
6. Question
The following passage is from a discussion of various ways that living creatures have been classified over the years.
The world can be classified in different ways,
depending on one’s interests and principles of clas-
sification. The classifications (also known as
Line
taxonomies) in turn determine which comparisons
5
seem natural or unnatural, which literal or analog-
ical. For example, it has been common to classify
living creatures into three distinct groups—plants,
animals, and humans. According to this classifica-
tion, human beings are not a special kind of
10
animal, nor animals a special kind of plant. Thus
any comparisons between the three groups are
strictly analogical. Reasoning from inheritance in
garden peas to inheritance in fruit flies, and from
these two species to inheritance in human beings,
15
is sheer poetic metaphor.
Another mode of classifying living creatures is
commonly attributed to Aristotle. Instead of treat-
ing plants, animals, and humans as distinct
groups, they are nested. All living creatures
20
possess a vegetative soul that enables them to
grow and metabolize. Of these, some also have a
sensory soul that enables them to sense their envi-
ronments and move. One species also has a
rational soul that is capable of true understanding.
25
Thus, human beings are a special sort of animal,
and animals are a special sort of plant. Given this
classification, reasoning from human beings to all
other species with respect to the attributes of the
vegetative soul is legitimate, reasoning from
30
human beings to other animals with respect to the
attributes of the sensory soul is also legitimate,
but reasoning from the rational characteristics of
the human species to any other species is merely
analogical. According to both classifications, the
35
human species is unique. In the first, it has a king-
dom all to itself; in the second, it stands at the
pinnacle of the taxonomic hierarchy.
Homo sapiens is unique. All species are. But
this sort of uniqueness is not enough for many
40
(probably most) people, philosophers included. For
some reason, it is very important that the species
to which we belong be uniquely unique. It is of
utmost importance that the human species be
insulated from all other species with respect to
45
how we explain certain qualities. Human beings
clearly are capable of developing and learning
languages. For some reason, it is very important
that the waggle dance performed by bees * not
count as a genuine language. I have never been
50
able to understand why. I happen to think that the
waggle dance differs from human languages to
such a degree that little is gained by terming them
both “languages,” but even if “language” is so
defined that the waggle dance slips in, bees still
55
remain bees. It is equally important to some that
no other species use tools. No matter how inge-
nious other species get in the manipulation of
objects in their environment, it is absolutely
essential that nothing they do count as “tool use.”
60
I, however, fail to see what difference it makes
whether any of these devices such as probes and
anvils, etc. are really tools. All the species
involved remain distinct biological species no
matter what decisions are made. Similar observa-
65
tions hold for rationality and anything a computer
might do.
Which best summarizes the idea of “uniquely unique” (line 42)?
CorrectIncorrect -
Question 7 of 8
7. Question
The following passage is from a discussion of various ways that living creatures have been classified over the years.
The world can be classified in different ways,
depending on one’s interests and principles of clas-
sification. The classifications (also known as
Line
taxonomies) in turn determine which comparisons
5
seem natural or unnatural, which literal or analog-
ical. For example, it has been common to classify
living creatures into three distinct groups—plants,
animals, and humans. According to this classifica-
tion, human beings are not a special kind of
10
animal, nor animals a special kind of plant. Thus
any comparisons between the three groups are
strictly analogical. Reasoning from inheritance in
garden peas to inheritance in fruit flies, and from
these two species to inheritance in human beings,
15
is sheer poetic metaphor.
Another mode of classifying living creatures is
commonly attributed to Aristotle. Instead of treat-
ing plants, animals, and humans as distinct
groups, they are nested. All living creatures
20
possess a vegetative soul that enables them to
grow and metabolize. Of these, some also have a
sensory soul that enables them to sense their envi-
ronments and move. One species also has a
rational soul that is capable of true understanding.
25
Thus, human beings are a special sort of animal,
and animals are a special sort of plant. Given this
classification, reasoning from human beings to all
other species with respect to the attributes of the
vegetative soul is legitimate, reasoning from
30
human beings to other animals with respect to the
attributes of the sensory soul is also legitimate,
but reasoning from the rational characteristics of
the human species to any other species is merely
analogical. According to both classifications, the
35
human species is unique. In the first, it has a king-
dom all to itself; in the second, it stands at the
pinnacle of the taxonomic hierarchy.
Homo sapiens is unique. All species are. But
this sort of uniqueness is not enough for many
40
(probably most) people, philosophers included. For
some reason, it is very important that the species
to which we belong be uniquely unique. It is of
utmost importance that the human species be
insulated from all other species with respect to
45
how we explain certain qualities. Human beings
clearly are capable of developing and learning
languages. For some reason, it is very important
that the waggle dance performed by bees * not
count as a genuine language. I have never been
50
able to understand why. I happen to think that the
waggle dance differs from human languages to
such a degree that little is gained by terming them
both “languages,” but even if “language” is so
defined that the waggle dance slips in, bees still
55
remain bees. It is equally important to some that
no other species use tools. No matter how inge-
nious other species get in the manipulation of
objects in their environment, it is absolutely
essential that nothing they do count as “tool use.”
60
I, however, fail to see what difference it makes
whether any of these devices such as probes and
anvils, etc. are really tools. All the species
involved remain distinct biological species no
matter what decisions are made. Similar observa-
65
tions hold for rationality and anything a computer
might do.
In line 44, “insulated from” means
CorrectIncorrect -
Question 8 of 8
8. Question
The following passage is from a discussion of various ways that living creatures have been classified over the years.
The world can be classified in different ways,
depending on one’s interests and principles of clas-
sification. The classifications (also known as
Line
taxonomies) in turn determine which comparisons
5
seem natural or unnatural, which literal or analog-
ical. For example, it has been common to classify
living creatures into three distinct groups—plants,
animals, and humans. According to this classifica-
tion, human beings are not a special kind of
10
animal, nor animals a special kind of plant. Thus
any comparisons between the three groups are
strictly analogical. Reasoning from inheritance in
garden peas to inheritance in fruit flies, and from
these two species to inheritance in human beings,
15
is sheer poetic metaphor.
Another mode of classifying living creatures is
commonly attributed to Aristotle. Instead of treat-
ing plants, animals, and humans as distinct
groups, they are nested. All living creatures
20
possess a vegetative soul that enables them to
grow and metabolize. Of these, some also have a
sensory soul that enables them to sense their envi-
ronments and move. One species also has a
rational soul that is capable of true understanding.
25
Thus, human beings are a special sort of animal,
and animals are a special sort of plant. Given this
classification, reasoning from human beings to all
other species with respect to the attributes of the
vegetative soul is legitimate, reasoning from
30
human beings to other animals with respect to the
attributes of the sensory soul is also legitimate,
but reasoning from the rational characteristics of
the human species to any other species is merely
analogical. According to both classifications, the
35
human species is unique. In the first, it has a king-
dom all to itself; in the second, it stands at the
pinnacle of the taxonomic hierarchy.
Homo sapiens is unique. All species are. But
this sort of uniqueness is not enough for many
40
(probably most) people, philosophers included. For
some reason, it is very important that the species
to which we belong be uniquely unique. It is of
utmost importance that the human species be
insulated from all other species with respect to
45
how we explain certain qualities. Human beings
clearly are capable of developing and learning
languages. For some reason, it is very important
that the waggle dance performed by bees * not
count as a genuine language. I have never been
50
able to understand why. I happen to think that the
waggle dance differs from human languages to
such a degree that little is gained by terming them
both “languages,” but even if “language” is so
defined that the waggle dance slips in, bees still
55
remain bees. It is equally important to some that
no other species use tools. No matter how inge-
nious other species get in the manipulation of
objects in their environment, it is absolutely
essential that nothing they do count as “tool use.”
60
I, however, fail to see what difference it makes
whether any of these devices such as probes and
anvils, etc. are really tools. All the species
involved remain distinct biological species no
matter what decisions are made. Similar observa-
65
tions hold for rationality and anything a computer
might do.
In the third paragraph, the author criticizes those who believe that
CorrectIncorrect