The passage states that in the ninth century, France created the royal office of the Luparii, or wolf-catchers, to handle the wolf problem. However, this office became unnecessary once the last wolf was killed. Therefore, the resurgence of wolves can't be blamed on the office shutting down.
Other options provide clearer explanations:
Option A: The protected status of wolves in Europe, which makes hunting them illegal except for occasional state-sanctioned culls, and efforts by NGOs to track and count them, also contribute to their recovery.
Option B: Rural depopulation is a factor. For example, in Lozère, the population dropped from over 140,000 in the mid-19th century to fewer than 80,000 today as farming and mining declined.
Option D: As humans withdraw, forests are expanding. From 1990 to 2015, France's forest cover increased by 102,000 hectares per year, with nearly one-third of mainland France now covered by woodland.
The correct option is (C): The shutting down of the royal office of the Luparii.
Residents of Lozère, a hilly area in southern France, share common rural complaints. In remote villages like Le Bacon and Le Bacon Vieux, mayors grumble about the lack of local schools, jobs, and phone and internet connections. Farmers are also worried about the return of wolves, which were eradicated from France last century but are now gradually returning to the forests and hills. Francis Palombi, an aspiring parliamentarian, addressed this issue during an election campaign, saying, "The wolf must be taken in hand." While tourists enjoy visiting a wolf park in Lozère, farmers are concerned about their livestock and livelihoods.
Options B, C, and D can be clearly inferred from this paragraph:
The passage also mentions that while many people still hold hunting licenses, few actively hunt. Therefore, Option A, which states there is a decline in the number of hunting licenses, is incorrect.
To weaken the author's claim, we need to identify a statement that challenges the assertions or implications made in the passage. The author discusses the return of wolves to Lozère, noting:
An effective way to undermine these points is by presenting consequences of wolf return that contradict the author's optimistic view, especially regarding tourism.
The statement "Wolf attacks on tourists in Lozère are on the rise" directly challenges the third point. If wolves pose a danger to tourists, this would deter visitors, leading to a negative economic and social impact, thereby weakening the author's positive portrayal of tourism potential.
Conclusion: This statement introduces a serious concern that the author overlooks, making it a strong contender to weaken the overall argument.
"As the lupine population of Europe spreads westwards, with occasional reports of wolves seen closer to urban areas, expect to hear of more clashes between farmers and those who celebrate the predators' return. Farmers' losses are real, but are not the only economic story. Tourist venues, such as parks where wolves are kept and the animals' spread is discussed, also generate income and jobs in rural areas."
The passage mentions that farmers in Lozère are worried about wolves returning and causing livestock losses. Meanwhile, environmentalists see wolves as a sign of broader ecological health. The proposed economic solution involves creating tourist attractions related to wolves, like parks. These attractions help address farmers' economic concerns by generating income and align with environmentalists' interests in the return of wolves. Therefore, Option D accurately reflects the collaboration between farmers and environmentalists in the proposed solution.
Directions: There is a sentence that is missing in the paragraph below. Look at the paragraph and decide where (Option 1, 2, 3, or 4) the following sentence would best fit.
Sentence: This philosophical cut at one's core beliefs, values, and way of life is difficult enough.
Paragraph:
The experience of reading philosophy is often disquieting. When reading philosophy, the values around which one has heretofore organised one's life may come to look provincial, flatly wrong, or even evil. __(1)__ When beliefs previously held as truths are rendered implausible, new beliefs, values, and ways of living may be required. __(2)__ What's worse, philosophers admonish each other to remain unsutured until such time as a defensible new answer is revealed or constructed. Sometimes philosophical writing is even strictly critical in that it does not even attempt to provide an alternative after tearing down a cultural or conceptual citadel. __(3)__ The reader of philosophy must be prepared for the possibility of this experience. While reading philosophy can help one clarify one's values, and even make one self-conscious for the first time of the fact that there are good reasons for believing what one believes, it can also generate Un remediated doubt that is difficult to live with.
The given sentence, "This philosophical cut at one's core beliefs, values, and way of life is difficult enough.", fits best at Option 2 in the paragraph. Here's the explanation:
The sentence describes the challenging nature of philosophical exploration—a theme that is presented right after discussing the possibility of old beliefs being rendered implausible. Here is how the paragraph is structured with the inserted sentence:
The experience of reading philosophy is often disquieting. When reading philosophy, the values around which one has heretofore organised one's life may come to look provincial, flatly wrong, or even evil. When beliefs previously held as truths are rendered implausible, new beliefs, values, and ways of living may be required. This philosophical cut at one's core beliefs, values, and way of life is difficult enough. What's worse, philosophers admonish each other to remain unsutured until such time as a defensible new answer is revealed or constructed. Sometimes philosophical writing is even strictly critical in that it does not even attempt to provide an alternative after tearing down a cultural or conceptual citadel. The reader of philosophy must be prepared for the possibility of this experience. While reading philosophy can help one clarify one's values, and even make one self-conscious for the first time of the fact that there are good reasons for believing what one believes, it can also generate unremediated doubt that is difficult to live with.
Thus, the insertion at Option 2 succinctly connects the preceding and following ideas regarding the unsettling impact of philosophical reading.
Meta is recalibrating content on its social media platforms as the political tide has turned in Washington, with Mark Zuckerberg announcing last week that his company plans to fire its US fact-checkers. Fact-checking evolved in response to allegations of misinformation and is being watered down in response to accusations of censorship. Social media does not have solutions to either. Community review — introduced by Elon Musk at X and planned by Zuckerberg for Facebook and Instagram — is not a significant improvement over fact-checking. Having Washington lean on foreign governments over content moderation does not benefit free speech. Yet, that is the nature of the social media beast, designed to amplify bias.
Information and misinformation continue to jostle on social media at the mercy of user discretion. Social media now has enough control over all other forms of media to broaden its reach. It is the connective tissue for mass consumption of entertainment, and alternative platforms are reworking their engagement with social media. Technologies are shaping up to drive this advantage further through synthetic content targeted precisely at its intended audience. Meta’s algorithm will now play up politics because it is the flavour of the season.
The Achilles’ Heel of social media is informed choice which could turn against misinformation. Its move away from content moderation is driven by the need to be more inclusive, yet unfiltered content can push users away from social media towards legacy forms that have better moderation systems in place. Lawmakers across the world are unlikely to give social media a free run, even if Donald Trump is working on their case. Protections have already been put in place across jurisdictions over misinformation. These may be difficult to dismantle, even if the Republicans pull US-owned social media companies further to the right.
Media consumption is, in essence, evidence-based judgement that mediums must adapt to. Content moderation, not free speech, is the adaptation mechanism. Musk and Zuckerberg are not exempt
According to the French philosopher Jean Baudrillard, commodities available for consumption are not inherently negative things. Baudrillard tried to interpret consumption in modern societies by engaging with the ’cargo myth’ prevalent among the indigenous Melanesian people living in the South Pacific. The Melanesians did not know what aeroplanes were. However,they saw that these winged entities descended from the air for white people and appeared to make them happy. They also noted that aeroplanes never descended for the Melanesian people. The Melanesian natives noted that the white people had placed objects similar to the aeroplane on the ground. They concluded that these objects were attracting the aeroplanes in the air and bringing them to the ground. Through a magical process, the aeroplanes were bringing plenty to the white people and making them happy. The Melanesian people concluded that they would need to place objects that simulated the aeroplane on the ground and attract them from the air. Baudrillard believes that the cargo myth holds an important analogy for the ways in which consumers engage with objects of consumption.
According to Baudrillard, the modern consumer ”sets in place a whole array of sham objects, of characteristic signs of happiness, and then waits for happiness to alight”. For instance, modern consumers believe that they will get happiness if they buy the latest available version of a mobile phone or automobile. However, consumption does not usually lead to happiness. While consumers should ideally be blaming their heightened expectations for their lack of happiness, they blame the commodity instead.
They feel that they should have waited for the next version of a mobile phone or automobile before buying the one they did. The version they bought is somehow inferior and therefore cannot make them happy. Baudrillard argues that consumers have replaced ’real’ happiness with ’signs’ of happiness. This results in the endless deferment of the arrival of total happiness. In Baudrillard’s words, ”in everyday practice, the blessings of consumption are not experienced as resulting from work or from a production process; they are experienced as a miracle”. Modern consumers view consumption in the same magical way as the Melanesian people viewed the aeroplanes in the cargo myth. Television commercials also present objects of consumption as miracles. As a result, commodities appear to be distanced from the social processes which lead to their production. In effect, objects of consumption are divorced from the reality which produces them.
CONVERSATION ANALYSIS: Read the following transcript and choose the answer that is closest to each of the questions that are based on the transcript.
Lucia Rahilly (Global Editorial Director, The McKinsey Podcast): Today we’re talking about the next big arenas of competition, about the industries that will matter most in the global business landscape, which you describe as arenas of competition. What do we mean when we use this term?
Chris Bradley (Director, McKinsey Global Institute): If I go back and look at the top ten companies in 2005, they were in traditional industries such as oil and gas, retail, industrials, and pharmaceuticals. The average company was worth about $250 billion. If I advance the clock forward to 2020, nine in ten of those companies have been replaced, and by companies that are eight times bigger than the old guards.
And this new batch of companies comes from these new arenas or competitive sectors. In fact, they’re so different that we have a nickname for them. If you’re a fan of Harry Potter, it’s wizards versus muggles.
Arena industries are wizardish; we found that there’s a set of industries that play by very different set of economic rules and get very different results, while the rest, the muggles (even though they run the world, finance the world, and energize the world), play by a more traditional set of economic rules.
Lucia Rahilly: Could we put a finer point on what is novel or different about the lens that you applied to determine what’s a wizard and what’s a muggle?
Chris Bradley: Wizards are defined by growth and dynamism. We looked at where value is flowing and the places where value is moving. And where is the value flowing? What we see is that this set of wizards, which represent about ten percent of industries, hog 45 percent of the growth in market cap. But there’s another dimension or axis too, which is dynamism. That is measured by a new metric we’ve come up with called the ”shuffle rate.” How much does the bottom move to the top? It turns out that in this set of wizardish industries, or arenas, the shuffle rate is much higher than it is in the traditional industry.
Lucia Rahilly: So, where are we seeing the most profit?
Chris Bradley: The economic profit, which is the profit you make minus the cost for the capital you employ is in the wizard industries. It’s where R&D happens; they’re two times more R&D intensive. They’re big stars, the nebulae, where new business is born.