Which one of the following best explains the role played by the Portuguese man o’ war’s resemblance to a jellyfish in the passage?

. This is a symbolic-function question. The jellyfish resemblance is NOT just biological trivia.nIt mirrors the passage’s larger philosophical theme i.e. appearance ≠ reality, beauty ≠ harmlessness, organism ≠ individual. The entire passage repeatedly destabilizes surface perception. Now examine the traps carefully. Option 1- taxonomic systems fail. Too narrow and technical. The passage is philosophical, not mainly classificatory. Reduction trap. Option 2- appearances conceal deeper realities. Perfect. This connects jellyfish resemblance, deceptive beauty, decentralized individuality, hidden danger. It integrates the ENTIRE argument structure. That’s why it’s correct. Option 3- evolutionary mimicry. Unsupported. The passage never claims mimicry evolved intentionally. Scientific-overreach trap. Option 4- science overturns assumptions. Tempting. But this over-centers science rather than the broader philosophical point about perception itself. Misplaced emphasis trap.

Which one of the following, if true, would least weaken the passage’s portrayal of the Portuguese man o’ war as an organism organized without centralized control?

. This is a brutal least weaken question. The author’s claim - no commander, no brain, decentralized cooperation. Now find the option that damages this idea the LEAST. Option 1 - local chemical signaling This barely weakens the argument. Why? Because decentralized systems can still communicate locally. Local coordination ≠ centralized command. Think ant colonies. Think neurons. Think markets. The overall argument survives almost completely. Thus correct. Option 2 - adaptive coordination patterns. More damaging. Suggests sophisticated system-level organization possibly resembling central regulation. Option 3 - specialized interdependent zooids. Actually strengthens the passage. Trap. Option 4 - evolved from centralized ancestors This weakens the philosophical force significantly. Because decentralized organization becomes evolutionarily derivative rather than radically alternative. More damaging than Option 1.

Which one of the following can be most reasonably inferred about the author’s understanding of “beauty” in nature?

. This is a deep abstraction question disguised as a simple theme question. The passage’s final paragraph argues that humans incorrectly associate beauty with safety, “appearance and intention rarely align as neatly as humans expect.” Now analyze carefully. Option 1 - evolved primarily to conceal danger. Too intentional. The passage never attributes evolutionary purpose to beauty. Teleology trap. Option 2- humans assume elegance = harmlessness. Perfect. Captures the exact psychological criticism - "humans project moral expectations onto appearance." Option 3 - outward appearance contradicts ecological function. Very tempting. But this is broader and more biological than the author’s actual point. The passage emphasizes HUMAN EXPECTATION more than evolutionary contradiction itself. Subtle distinction. This is elite-level trap design. Option 4 - beauty accidental by-product. Unsupported. The passage never discusses evolutionary origins of beauty. Scope invention trap.

Which one of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the passage’s claim that the Portuguese man o’ war challenges conventional notions of individuality?

. This is a framework-collapse question. The author’s major philosophical claim is - the Portuguese man o’ war destabilizes human assumptions about individuality. Why? Because - many semi-independent parts, specialized labor, no central commander, yet one functioning organism. Now ask yourself that which option weakens that “challenge” most deeply? Option 1 - genetically from one fertilized organism. Tempting. But this does NOT destroy the individuality problem. Even genetically unified organisms can still challenge conventional ideas of selfhood. Partial weakening only. Option 2 - other species also collective. This weakens uniqueness, not the philosophical challenge itself. Subtle trap. Option 3 - lacks centralized nervous system. Direct support. Trap. Option 4 - human organs behave similarly. Boom. This is devastating because it normalizes the siphonophore structure. If humans themselves already function through specialized dependent units, division of labor, survival interdependence, then the Portuguese man o’ war no longer radically challenges individuality. It becomes an extreme variation of a familiar biological principle. This attacks the passage’s central contrast - human individuality vs siphonophore collectivity. That’s why it’s correct.

GRADFLIX — Essays for Curious Minds

RC Passages for CAT, GMAT, GRE, XAT & IPMAT

GRADFLIX is India's premier reading comprehension library for competitive exam aspirants. We publish curated long-form essays across philosophy, psychology, science, history, economics, and culture — each paired with exam-level RC questions modelled after CAT, GMAT, GRE, XAT, and IPMAT patterns.

One Essay, Four Questions, Every Day

We release a fresh essay every day — spanning topics from quantum mechanics and evolutionary biology to political philosophy and literary theory. Each essay comes with four carefully crafted multiple-choice questions that test inference, tone, vocabulary in context, and logical structure. The practice is designed to sharpen not just your score, but your thinking.

Why GRADFLIX?

Most aspirants practise RC with stale, low-quality passages. GRADFLIX changes that. Every essay on our platform is handpicked for intellectual depth, original argument, and linguistic richness — the same qualities the best entrance exams test. Think of us as a reading alternative to Aeon, Smithsonian, Harvard Business Review, Scientific American, and Medium, but purpose-built for exam takers.

Who Is GRADFLIX For?

GRADFLIX is built for CAT VARC aspirants who want to read better, not just practise more. It is equally valuable for GMAT Verbal, GRE Reading Comprehension, XAT Decision Making, and IPMAT English candidates. If you are a serious reader who also happens to be preparing for an exam, GRADFLIX is your home.

Start Reading Today

Browse our library of essays, attempt today's RC set, and track your progress over time. Join thousands of aspirants who read with purpose every day.

Home
Nature & Environment
Animals
The Beautiful Predator: Inside the Strange World of the Portuguese Man o’ War

The Beautiful Predator: Inside the Strange World of the Portuguese Man o’ War

Explore the Portuguese man o’ war, the venomous ocean drifter that challenges ideas of beauty, individuality, and survival in nature.

The Portuguese man o’ war looks almost decorative while floating across tropical oceans. Its translucent sail glows blue and violet beneath sunlight, and from a distance it resembles a fragile plastic toy drifting on the waves. Marine biologists, however, warn swimmers to keep away from it. Beneath the surface hangs a network of tentacles that can stretch for dozens of metres and deliver intensely painful stings. “People often underestimate them because they appear delicate,” says jellyfish researcher Lisa-ann Gershwin. “But…

RC Questions

Each essay includes four exam-level RC questions for CAT, GMAT, GRE, XAT and IPMAT.

Which one of the following best explains the role played by the Portuguese man o’ war’s resemblance to a jellyfish in the passage?
This is a symbolic-function question. The jellyfish resemblance is NOT just biological trivia.nIt mirrors the passage’s larger philosophical theme i.e. appearance ≠ reality, beauty ≠ harmlessness, organism ≠ individual. The entire passage repeatedly destabilizes surface perception. Now examine the traps carefully. Option 1- taxonomic systems fail. Too narrow and technical. The passage is philosophical, not mainly classificatory. Reduction trap. Option 2- appearances conceal deeper realities. Perfect. This connects jellyfish resemblance, deceptive beauty, decentralized individuality, hidden danger. It integrates the ENTIRE argument structure. That’s why it’s correct. Option 3- evolutionary mimicry. Unsupported. The passage never claims mimicry evolved intentionally. Scientific-overreach trap. Option 4- science overturns assumptions. Tempting. But this over-centers science rather than the broader philosophical point about perception itself. Misplaced emphasis trap.
Which one of the following, if true, would least weaken the passage’s portrayal of the Portuguese man o’ war as an organism organized without centralized control?
This is a brutal least weaken question. The author’s claim - no commander, no brain, decentralized cooperation. Now find the option that damages this idea the LEAST. Option 1 - local chemical signaling This barely weakens the argument. Why? Because decentralized systems can still communicate locally. Local coordination ≠ centralized command. Think ant colonies. Think neurons. Think markets. The overall argument survives almost completely. Thus correct. Option 2 - adaptive coordination patterns. More damaging. Suggests sophisticated system-level organization possibly resembling central regulation. Option 3 - specialized interdependent zooids. Actually strengthens the passage. Trap. Option 4 - evolved from centralized ancestors This weakens the philosophical force significantly. Because decentralized organization becomes evolutionarily derivative rather than radically alternative. More damaging than Option 1.
Which one of the following can be most reasonably inferred about the author’s understanding of “beauty” in nature?
This is a deep abstraction question disguised as a simple theme question. The passage’s final paragraph argues that humans incorrectly associate beauty with safety, “appearance and intention rarely align as neatly as humans expect.” Now analyze carefully. Option 1 - evolved primarily to conceal danger. Too intentional. The passage never attributes evolutionary purpose to beauty. Teleology trap. Option 2- humans assume elegance = harmlessness. Perfect. Captures the exact psychological criticism - "humans project moral expectations onto appearance." Option 3 - outward appearance contradicts ecological function. Very tempting. But this is broader and more biological than the author’s actual point. The passage emphasizes HUMAN EXPECTATION more than evolutionary contradiction itself. Subtle distinction. This is elite-level trap design. Option 4 - beauty accidental by-product. Unsupported. The passage never discusses evolutionary origins of beauty. Scope invention trap.
Which one of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the passage’s claim that the Portuguese man o’ war challenges conventional notions of individuality?
This is a framework-collapse question. The author’s major philosophical claim is - the Portuguese man o’ war destabilizes human assumptions about individuality. Why? Because - many semi-independent parts, specialized labor, no central commander, yet one functioning organism. Now ask yourself that which option weakens that “challenge” most deeply? Option 1 - genetically from one fertilized organism. Tempting. But this does NOT destroy the individuality problem. Even genetically unified organisms can still challenge conventional ideas of selfhood. Partial weakening only. Option 2 - other species also collective. This weakens uniqueness, not the philosophical challenge itself. Subtle trap. Option 3 - lacks centralized nervous system. Direct support. Trap. Option 4 - human organs behave similarly. Boom. This is devastating because it normalizes the siphonophore structure. If humans themselves already function through specialized dependent units, division of labor, survival interdependence, then the Portuguese man o’ war no longer radically challenges individuality. It becomes an extreme variation of a familiar biological principle. This attacks the passage’s central contrast - human individuality vs siphonophore collectivity. That’s why it’s correct.

More Nature & Environment essays →

The Beautiful Predator: Inside the Strange World of the Portuguese Man o’ War