Anthropologist: In an experiment, two groups of undergraduates were

Question

Anthropologist: In an experiment, two groups of undergraduates were taught how to create one of the types of stone tools that the Neanderthals made in prehistoric times. One group was taught using both demonstrations and elaborate verbal explanations, whereas the other group learned by silent example alone. The two groups showed a significant difference neither in the speed with which they acquired the toolmaking skills nor in the level of proficiency they reached. This shows that Neanderthals could just as well have created their sophisticated tools even if they had no language

Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the anthropologist's argument?

(A) Apart from the sophistication of their stone tools, there is a great deal of evidence suggesting that Neanderthals possessed some form of language.

(B) The students who were taught with verbal explanations were allowed to discuss the toolmaking techniques among themselves, whereas the students who learned by silent example were not.

(C) The tools that the undergraduates were taught to make were much simpler and easier to make than most types of tools created by Neanderthals.

(D) The instructor who taught the group of students who learned by silent example alone was much less proficient at making the stone tools than was the instructor who taught the other group of students.

(E) The tools created by Neanderthals were much less sophisticated than the tools created by anatomically modem humans who almost certainly possessed language and lived at the same time as the Neanderthals.

Source: LSAT

SonalSinha803 · Answer

I find C a better answer. It is completely unclear that why E is right. Can someone please explain.

Posted from my mobile device

Princ · Answer

Conclusion : Neanderthals could have produced their sophisticaed tools even if they did not possess language.
 Premise : As two groups of students, one using language and the other not, were both able to produce  one of the types of tools  used by Neanderthals.

Prethinking  : Argument that can highlight the difference in tool made by 2 groups of student and Neanderthals will weaken the Conclusion

(A) Apart from the sophistication of their stone tools, there is a great deal of evidence suggesting that Neanderthals possessed some form of language.
   out of scope. The argument is about whether there is relation between Sophistication of the tools produced by Neanderthals and their language skill. This option is about whether there is other evidence that Neanderthals possessed language.

(B) The students who were taught with verbal explanations were allowed to discuss the toolmaking techniques among themselves, whereas the students who learned by silent example were not.
   This option strenghtens the argument as other group without any verbal explanation and discussion among themselves was able to make the tools at same proficiency as first group

(C) The tools that the undergraduates were taught to make were much simpler and easier to make than most types of tools created by Neanderthals.
  correct choice. As this option would make the comparision to undergraduate students less relevant since the tools made by the undergraduate students were less sophisticated than those made by the Neanderthals

(D) The instructor who taught the group of students who learned by silent example alone was much less proficient at making the stone tools than was the instructor who taught the other group of students.
  out of scope, As we are discussing the relation between langauge skills and ability of Neanderthals to make sophisticated tools  
 
(E) The tools created by Neanderthals were much less sophisticated than the tools created by anatomically modem humans who almost certainly possessed language and lived at the same time as the Neanderthals.
  out of scope. The question isn't whether the tools produced by Neanderthals were more (or less) sophisticated than those produced by anatomically modern humans, but whether the tools produced by Neanderthals are evidences that they possessed language.

OA should be C

ganand · Answer

SonalSinha803 ,  Princ ,
OA is C. Thank you for pointing it out.

push12345 · Answer

In the question stem 
Conclusion- Neanderthal have made tools in same way even if they don't have language

It uses results of experiment to reach conclusion.
But we can show that tools designed by Neanderthal are different from created during experiment we can weaken argument.

C and E r possible candidate

But E is wrong because if Neanderthal tools are much less sophisticated thenthe reasoning in argument somewhat support the conclusion.

Whereas C clearly states weakness in argument

Posted from my mobile device

Sushen · Answer

3. C Interpret stem: Weaken
Anthropologist: In an experiment, two groups of undergraduates were taught how to create one of the types of stone tools that the Neanderthals made in prehistoric times. One group was taught using both demonstrations and elaborate verbal explanations, whereas the other group learned by silent example alone. The two groups showed a significant difference neither in the speed with which they acquired the toolmaking skills nor in the level of proficiency they reached. This shows that Neanderthals could just as well have created their sophisticated tools even if they had no language

Conclusion: This shows that Neanderthals could just as well have created their sophisticated tools even if they had no language

General Prediction: “I need a reason that Neanderthals could NOT have made their amazing tools without language.
In other words, they needed language.

Interpret: what is language needed for? To collaborate with one another. To strengthen this “I need a reason that the N’s needed to collaborate with each other or others/other groups.”

Premises:
• Experiment—college students taught to make A tool
• They did it fine even in the group that did not use a verbal language to communicate.

Notice any WEAKNESSES in the argument:
  FLAW! OVERGENARALIZATION.  It generalized from Neanderthals to a modern group of students!

Specific Prediction/Considering the argument in its whole.

Maybe the students are just not the same as Neanderthals… the experiment has a FLAW! It generalized from Neanderthals to a modern group of students. Maybe the students could do it without language but the  Neanderthals may not have understood the techniques needed. The N’s may have needed more instruction than our students did. Maybe the N’s learned from a visiting tribe… all of that could mean they could need some type of verbal communication. 
A couple of points here:
• Specific predictions are not as helpful as general ones—they take longer to think of, they may not match the answers given, and as a comparison, the general prediction works BETTER!
• This is a clear example of a harder question. 700-level questions need PRACTICE, PRACTICE, PRACTICE so that your creative, problem-solving mind is stimulated and experienced. A young solver who is just starting to look at GMAT/LSAT problems would likely have a very difficult time with this question
• KEEP PRACTICING!
• On test day, you would have gone to the answers almost immediately after the general prediction.
• There ARE  HINTS in the passage --specific words--the students made one of many types of tools the N's made-- These hints help you to connect harder questions. Problem? It takes a lot of PRACTICE to learn to see these.
• KEEP PRACTICING!

A. Apart from the sophistication of their stone tools, there is a great deal of evidence suggesting that Neanderthals possessed some form of language.
So??? This doesn’t mean they needed it to make their tools.
B. The students who were taught with verbal explanations were allowed to discuss the toolmaking techniques among themselves, whereas the students who learned by silent example were not.
SOOO? No better than A at connecting to the conclusion.
C. The tools that the undergraduates were taught to make were much simpler and easier to make than most types of tools created by Neanderthals. Hmmmm. I wasn’t sure at first. This seems to need a bit of interpretation. I’ll come back. I think it MAY be our answer. I’ll check and see if D and E have errors.
D. The instructor who taught the group of students who learned by silent example alone was much less proficient at making the stone tools than was the instructor who taught the other group of students.
SOOOOOO??? What does this tell us about what the N’s needed??
E. The tools created by Neanderthals were much less sophisticated than the tools created by anatomically modem humans who almost certainly possessed language and lived at the same time as the Neanderthals.
Ewww. I am going to interpret C first. At first glance, I don’t think this connects me to the conclusion, and furthermore, I think it might be the OPPOSITE of what we want to do. Let’s do C.

C. As I consider, this simply says that IF a harder tool was made by the N’s, (see the specific words…) this MIGHT indeed be the reason that the N’s needed to collaborate, discuss ideas, communicate, learn from one another’s experience etc. This weakens the ability to get to the conclusion b/c it makes the experiment NOT valid. It makes the experiment an even bigger over generalization. This gives us the info we need to FAIL to get to the conclusion.
Done. Weakened!

Sushen · Answer

SonalSinha803 
I just posted a thorough example of a good thought process through this question that you may want to see. Also, the answer is C, not E.

unraveled · Answer

Anthropologist: In an experiment, two groups of undergraduates were taught how to create one of the types of stone tools that the Neanderthals made in prehistoric times. One group was taught using both demonstrations and elaborate verbal explanations, whereas the other group learned by silent example alone. The two groups showed a significant difference neither in the speed with which they acquired the toolmaking skills nor in the level of proficiency they reached. This shows that Neanderthals could just as well have created their sophisticated tools even if they had no language

Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the anthropologist's argument?

(A)  Apart from the sophistication of their stone tools , there is a great deal of evidence suggesting that Neanderthals possessed some form of language. - WRONG. Altogether diverts from the passage.

(B) The students who were taught with verbal explanations were  allowed to discuss  the toolmaking techniques among themselves, whereas the students who learned by silent example were not. - WRONG. Again somewhat strengthens not weakens if it does anything. Even discussion didn't help those students get ahead in their skills.

(C)  The tools that the undergraduates were taught to make were much simpler and easier to make  than most types of tools created by Neanderthals. - CORRECT. Gives a reason that conclusion might not be able to stand as the comparison is not apple to apple.

(D) The instructor who taught the group of students who learned by silent example alone  was much less proficient at making the stone tools than  was the instructor who taught the other group of students. - WRONG. Okay, Instructor factor is also there. But how does that relates to Neanderthals learning/building without language. In a way, this is similar to E but does not strengthens.

(E) The tools created by Neanderthals were  much less sophisticated than the tools created by anatomically modem humans  who almost certainly possessed language and lived at the same time as the Neanderthals. - WRONG. Irrelevant. This comparison doesn't helps in any way as in why Neanderthals's tools were sophisticated even if they had no language. It somewhat rather strengthens the case i.e. without language they were able to build.

Answer C.

VerbalBot · Answer

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot: 

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

 This post was generated automatically.

Anthropologist: In an experiment, two groups of undergraduates were

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Anthropologist: In an experiment, two groups of undergraduates were

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards