Bunuel wrote:
Humans evolved from homo sapiens in Europe and homo erectus in Asia. These species shared an identical genetic code, yet the tools used by them differed vastly. Therefore, historians conclude that tools developed and used had less to do with the genetic ability of the population and more with the requirements for survival.
What do the historians assume in drawing the conclusion?
A. There are more similarities than differences between homo sapiens and homo erectus.
B. Homo sapiens who had more easy access to food built tools that did not have the range that the tools built by homo erectus possessed.
C. Homo sapiens and homo erectus seldom had any contact with each other.
D. Homo Sapiens needed different tools to survive than Homo erectus did.
E. The tools developed in any region are dependent on natural resources such as steel, copper, etc. in that region
Conclusion: "historians conclude that tools developed and used had less to do with the genetic ability of the population and more with the requirements for survival."
Background Info: "Humans evolved from homo sapiens in Europe and homo erectus in Asia."
Premise: "These species shared an identical genetic code, yet the tools used by them differed vastly."
Option A: This options weakens the conclusion. If there are more similarity than differences then maybe the tools should also be similar too. Question steam asks to find an assumption. Clearly, this option is not an assumption. After all. even if this option choice was not true, ie "There are not
not more similarities than differences between homo sapiens and homo erectus.", the conclusion still stands.
Option B: Stay laser focused on the conclusion, this option is very seductive coz it explains why the tools might have been different. ALSO, this option talks abut the range of the tools, we are not concerned with the range of tools, we are concerned with the similarity of the tools. Hence, eliminate.
Option C: Again stay laser focused on the conclusion. Not sure why author needs to assume this. If you picked this, i can see you might have came up with a story of some kind that convinced you to pick this answer choice. Again we are here to find the assumption, so stay focused on the conclusion.
Option D: If the homo sapiens did not need different tools to survive than homo erectus did, then the conclusion falls apart. If they both needed the same types of tool for survival yet had possessed different types of tools, then maybe would be responsible for the observed variation of the tools. Notice, this assumption is very subtle, and that is the nature of assumptions.
Option E:This explains why they had different tools, we are not seeking for an explanation, we are seeking for an assumption. Hence, eliminate.
close
28 Dec 2022, 07:04
45%
(medium)
30%
(01:44)
wrong 
