Question

Ms. G, a student of environmental science, has cultivated a butterfly garden which provides a favourable habitat for butterflies. Ms. G has cultivated the butterfly garden so that she could observe and study the different stages of development of butterflies such as egg, larvae, pupae, and adult. In the given situation, which of the following statements is correct?

• A. Ms. G's approach to cultivation of butterfly garden is anthropocentric because it concerns the furtherance of her academic interest.
• B. Ms. G's approach to cultivation of butterfly garden is anthropocentric because it concerns the conservation of environment.
• C. Ms. G's approach to cultivation of butterfly garden is eco-centric because it concerns the provision a favourable habitat to the butterflies.
• D. Ms. G's approach to cultivation of butterfly garden is eco-centric because it concerns the understanding of the different stages of development of butterflies.
• A. Anthropocentrism and eco-centrism are different approaches to achieving sustainable development.
• B. Anthropocentrism focuses on the promotion of non-human interests.
• C. Eco-centrism is concerned with the promotion of both human and non-human interests.
• D. Anthropocentrism and eco-centrism are different approaches to protection of environment and sustainable development.
• A. The inherent value placed on humans and non-humans.
• B. The inherent value placed on living things and non-living things.
• C. The relationship between human society and environment.
• D. The relationship between non-humans and environment.
• A. It creates a corresponding duty on human beings to protect and preserve non-humans.
• B. It creates a corresponding duty on non-humans to protect the right to life of human beings.
• C. It is inclusive of the right of human beings to utilize non-human resources to the best of their advantage.
• D. It is inclusive of the right of non-humans to utilize human resources to the best of their advantage.
• A. Private ownership of forests is unwarranted.
• B. Forests are held by the State in a fiduciary capacity.
• C. State is obligated to maintain forests for their economic value.
• D. State is obligated to maintain forests in the interest of humans and non-humans.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is A

The test the passage sets up is not what Ms. G did, but why she did it: anthropocentrism asks whether the underlying motive serves human interest, while eco-centrism asks whether non-human interests are valued for their own sake, independent of any human benefit. Ms. G's stated reason for the garden is to observe and study butterfly development, an academic purpose.

1. Option (A): Since her purpose is to further her own study and learning, a human academic interest, the garden is best explained as serving that human end, which is exactly what the anthropocentric label captures. The butterflies benefit as a side effect of pursuing her academic goal, not as the goal itself.
2. Option (B): Nothing in the facts points to conservation as her motive; she describes her purpose as studying developmental stages, not preserving the species as an end in itself, so this reasoning does not fit the facts even if the anthropocentric label were otherwise apt.
3. Option (C): Supplying a habitat looks eco-centric on the surface, but the passage's test cares about whose interest is actually being served; here, the habitat is instrumental to Ms. G's own study, so it does not reflect an intrinsic valuing of the butterflies independent of her interest.
4. Option (D): Wanting to understand developmental stages is itself an academic, human-centered goal; using the butterflies as subjects of study to build human knowledge keeps the motivation squarely on the human side of the line, not the eco-centric side.

The correct answer is Ms. G's approach to cultivation of butterfly garden is anthropocentric because it concerns the furtherance of her academic interest.

Answer 2

The passage draws its clearest line around what each paradigm treats as having value: anthropocentrism gives non-humans only instrumental value serving humans, while eco-centrism treats nature, meaning humans and non-humans together, as the unit of concern, without letting human interest automatically override non-human interest.

1. Option (A): Since the passage itself says sustainable development carries an anthropocentric bias, it is not a neutral endpoint that both paradigms approach as equally valid alternatives; this framing does not match how the passage sets up the relationship.
2. Option (B): The passage is explicit that anthropocentrism centers human interest and gives non-humans only instrumental value, the opposite of what this statement claims.
3. Option (C): Because eco-centrism folds both humans and non-humans into a single conception of nature, and only denies human interest automatic priority rather than excluding it, it does concern itself with both human and non-human interests together. This matches the passage's own description closely.
4. Option (D): This repeats the same mismatch as the first option, treating sustainable development as a shared goal the two paradigms simply approach differently, when the passage frames sustainable development as itself anthropocentrically slanted.

The correct answer is Eco-centrism is concerned with the promotion of both human and non-human interests.

Answer 3

Strip the passage down to its essential contrast and it comes down to one question: does a non-human being matter only because it is useful to humans, or does it matter in its own right? Anthropocentrism answers with instrumental value alone; eco-centrism answers with intrinsic value. That value-based distinction is what the question is really asking about.

1. Option (A): This is precisely the value-based distinction the passage draws, instrumental value to humans under anthropocentrism against intrinsic, independent value under eco-centrism, so this correctly names the basis of the difference.
2. Option (B): A living versus non-living split does not track the passage's own examples, since resources like air and rivers, which are non-living, are still treated as falling within the scope of the concern later in the passage; the real divide is about humans and non-humans, not animate versus inanimate matter.
3. Option (C): Describing the difference in terms of the general relationship between human society and environment is too broad to be the actual basis of distinction; both paradigms engage with that relationship, so this does not pinpoint what separates them.
4. Option (D): Framing this around non-humans' relationship with the environment, rather than around the value placed on non-humans relative to humans, shifts attention to the wrong comparison and misses the passage's actual point of contrast.

The correct answer is The inherent value placed on humans and non-humans.

Answer 4

The passage links the right to life to a conservation duty in a single sentence: protecting the right to life is described as inseparable from protecting the environment, and the Constitution is said to cast an obligation on human beings to protect and preserve species from extinction. That sentence supplies the answer directly.

1. Option (A): This restates the passage's own point almost exactly, that the right to life carries with it a duty on humans to protect and preserve non-human species, so it is well supported by the text.
2. Option (B): Non-humans are not treated anywhere in the passage as bearers of legal duties toward humans; the obligation described runs only in the other direction, from humans toward non-humans.
3. Option (C): Turning the right to life into a right to exploit non-human resources contradicts the passage's actual framing, which speaks of protecting and preserving species, not using them to human advantage.
4. Option (D): There is no textual basis for treating non-humans as holding a right to use human resources; this reverses a relationship the passage never describes in the first place.

The correct answer is It creates a corresponding duty on human beings to protect and preserve non-humans.

Answer 5

The public trust doctrine, as the passage lays it out, has three moving parts: certain resources cannot fairly be privately owned, the state holds them as a trustee for the public, and the state's duty in that role reaches beyond mere public benefit to the welfare of flora, fauna and wildlife. Checking each option against these three parts isolates the one that does not fit.

1. Option (A): The passage directly states that making forests a subject of private ownership would be unjustified given their importance to people as a whole, so this statement is consistent with the doctrine.
2. Option (B): Trusteeship is, in substance, a fiduciary arrangement, and the passage explicitly describes the government's role over these resources in exactly those terms, so this statement holds up.
3. Option (C): Tying the state's obligation to economic value contradicts the passage's explicit language that the duty goes beyond benefiting the public to serving flora, fauna and wildlife; economic value is never mentioned as the basis for the obligation. This statement does not fit the doctrine as described.
4. Option (D): The passage's own description of the state's duty extending to the best interest of flora, fauna and wildlife, alongside the public, is captured accurately by this statement.

The correct answer is State is obligated to maintain forests for their economic value.