Very little is known about

Answer choices

1. A

   No Impact12% picked this

   The primary source of clues about the lives of prehistoric hominids is

   The evidence in this argument involved skeletal remains. This answer just tells us that skeletal remains are the most common form of evidence about prehistoric hominids. But this answer does nothing to get us from, "If prehistoric hominids had the same skeletal fractures as rodeo riders do, then prehistoric hominids probably did stuff similar to rodeo riders."

   12%
2. B

   No Impact0% picked this

   The most important aspect of prehistoric life to be studied is how

   This answer isn't explicitly about "how food was obtained" at all. We might read between the lines and see some of that, but that concept is largely out of scope. This answer doesn't help us get from "hominids had skeletal injuries similar to what rodeo riders have; thus, hominids probably engaged in activities similar to rodeo riders".

   0%
3. C

   Bad Conclusion Match0% picked this

   If direct evidence as to the cause of a phenomenon is available, then indirect evidence

   This is a principle that allows us to conclude that we "shouldn't go looking for indirect evidence". We need a principle that helps us conclude that "early hominids were engaged in activities similar to rodeo riders", so this is miles off target.

   0%
4. D

   Correct81% picked this

   If there is a similarity between two effects, then there is probably a similarity

   Why this is right

   This rule would help us conclude that "there is probably a similarity between causes", and our actual conclusion is "it is likely that cave dwellers engaged in similar activities", so we should consider whether we can make this work. The premise talked about a similarity of skeletal fractures. The conclusion is talking about a similarity of activities (chasing and tackling animals). Can we call "chasing and tackling animals" the cause, and "skeletal fractures'" the effect? Sure. It's not explicitly said, but that's the common sense interpretation of what this author is suggesting. The whole reason the author surmises that early hominids were also chasing and tackling animals is because she's trying to explain the curious fact of why these early hominids had skeletal fractures like rodeo riders do. Essentially, the author is thinking, "If these hominids have skeletal fractures that match what rodeo riders have, then they both got these fractures from the same activity."

   Skill tested: Principle-Strengthen · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   81%
5. E

   Weak Evidence / Conclusion Match6% picked this

   The frequency with which a hazardous activity is performed is proportional to the frequency of injuries

   This argument would help us bridge an argument gap like, "Prehistoric hominids chased and tackled animals three times as much as rodeo riders do. Thus, prehistoric hominids probably had 3 times as many injuries from chasing and tackling animals." The argument didn't really discuss the frequency of injuries; it talked about the "type and distribution" of fractures. And the evidence didn't say that hominids' head injuries were from chasing and tackling animals. That's the new idea that the conclusion is trying to establish. This answer is saying, "If we know you do activity X half as much as Bob, then you'll have half as many injuries from X as Bob does". The idea of Proportionality goes in both directions, so this could also support an argument that says, "Since you have as many injuries from X as Bob does, then you must do activity X half as much as Bob". This argument did not say: "Hominids have a similar frequency of injuries from chasing and tackling animals as do rodeo riders. Thus, they probably engaged in chasing and tackling animals about as frequently as rodeo riders do". The argument said: "Hominids have a similar type/distribution of skeletal injuries as rodeo riders do. Thus, they probably engage in activities like chasing and tackling animals, as rodeo riders do."

   6%