Text 1: Biologist Park argues that group selection — natural selection operating on whole groups rather than individuals — is rare and usually weak. Most apparent group benefits, she contends, dissolve on inspection into selection on individuals or genes whose strategy happens to benefit groups.
Text 2: Biologist Singh accepts Park's general framework but argues that group selection has been too quickly dismissed in certain cases. In tightly bound social insects and microbial communities, he contends, between-group selection can outweigh within-group selection in ways individual-level models miss. The default skepticism is healthy, but the conclusion shouldn't be foreclosed.
Based on the texts, how would Singh (Text 2) most likely respond to Park's framework?
- A
He would reject the framework outright as fundamentally wrong.
- B
He would agree that group selection has no plausible cases at all.
- Ccheck_circle
He would accept the general framework but argue that some specific cases warrant a more open verdict.
- D
He would say individual-level models are useless.
Explanation
Singh accepts the general skepticism but argues for openness in specific cases. C captures this partial agreement. A and D overstate; B reverses his view.