Soru

Zorluk: Çok zorStrengthen

Anthropologist: The earliest known permanent human settlements in the Xylos Valley date to the exact same period as the valley's first evidence of systematic agriculture. Most historians conclude that the advent of agriculture provided a reliable food surplus, enabling formerly nomadic populations to settle. However, paleoclimatological data reveals that immediately prior to this period, a severe climatic shift drastically reduced the migratory range of the valley's primary game animals. Thus, it was likely the geographic confinement of this critical food source, rather than the adoption of agriculture, that primarily precipitated the transition to permanent settlements.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the anthropologist's argument?

  1. In neighboring valleys that experienced the identical climatic shift but where the terrain precluded systematic agriculture, contemporaneous nomadic populations also transitioned to permanent settlements.Cevap
  2. B
    The types of crops first cultivated in the Xylos Valley required intensive year-round maintenance and could not be successfully grown by populations moving seasonally.
  3. C
    The primary game animals of the Xylos Valley possessed migratory patterns that were highly sensitive to even minor fluctuations in regional precipitation.
  4. D
    Following the climatic shift, the primary game animals of the Xylos Valley were completely incapable of surviving outside of their newly confined geographic range.
  5. E
    Nomadic populations in regions that did not experience a climatic shift eventually developed systematic agriculture much later than the populations in the Xylos Valley.

Cevap

The statement showing that neighboring valleys with the same climate shift but no agriculture also saw populations transition to permanent settlements.
The correct answer utilizes a classic logical reasoning structure to strengthen a causal claim: isolating variables. The stimulus presents a situation with two concurrent potential causes for permanent settlement (agriculture and game confinement). The correct option introduces a parallel scenario (neighboring valleys) where one cause is eliminated (no agriculture) but the other is present (climate shift), and shows that the effect (settlement) still occurred. This strongly implies that the climate shift, not agriculture, was the primary driver of the settlement.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the core argument structure.
Identify the causal dispute: Historians argue Agriculture caused Settlement. The Anthropologist argues Game Confinement (due to Climate Shift) caused Settlement.
Understanding the competing causal claims is necessary to know how to support the author's specific conclusion.
2
Identify the logical gap or vulnerability in the anthropologist's argument.
The anthropologist observes a correlation between the climate shift, agriculture, and settlement. The vulnerability is that agriculture might still be the primary driver, and the climate shift merely a coincidence or a catalyst for agriculture.
To strengthen a causal argument, one must address its vulnerabilities, often by eliminating alternative causes or showing that the cause produces the effect independently.
3
Evaluate the options based on their ability to isolate the anthropologist's hypothesized cause.
The correct option provides a scenario where the competing cause (agriculture) is removed, but the hypothesized cause (climate shift/game confinement) remains, and the effect (settlement) still occurs.
This 'control group' methodology perfectly strengthens the causal relationship claimed by the author by ruling out agriculture as the necessary driving force.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Causal Arguments via Control Scenarios
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular