Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Hard

PT150 S1 P4 Q26 ExplanationEvolutionary Implications of Cooking

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

TopicsInferenceSociety

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Passage

It might reasonably have been expected that the adoption of cooking by early humans would not have led to any changes in human digestive anatomy. After all, cooking makes food easier to eat, which means that no special adaptations are required to process cooked food. However, current evidence suggests that humans today such efficiency, we suggest, led to an inability to survive on raw-food diets in the wild.

Important questions therefore arise concerning what limits the ability of humans to utilize raw food. The principal effect of cooking considered to date has been a reduction in tooth and jaw size over evolutionary time. Human tooth and jaw size show signs of decreasing approximately 100,000 years ago; we suggest that this may prove to result from later modifications in cooking technique, such as the adoption of boiling.

The evolution of soft parts of the digestive system is harder to reconstruct because they leave no fossil record. Human digestive anatomy differs from that of the other great apes in ways that have traditionally been explained as adaptations to a high raw-meat diet. Differences include the smaller gut volume, longer small meat. Testing between the cooking and raw-meat models for understanding human digestive anatomy is therefore warranted.

What this question is testing

Inference

Your task

Find what must be true based on what the passage or stimulus states.

Common trap

Answers that are plausible or likely but not actually guaranteed by the text.

Winning move

Keep only the choice the statements fully support — eliminate anything that requires an extra assumption.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
26.

The authors suggest which one of the following in the

Answer choices, explained

  1. Too Strong: only13% picked this

    Human teeth and jaws underwent their only major reduction in size about

    Even if we only see the one 100k years ago mentioned, we're not allowed to assume that "the only one mentioned = the only one". This answer also seems fairly contradicted by the tooth/jaw reduction 1.9 millions years ago by Homo ergaster, although I think that species is distant enough that it probably doesn't count as "human" any more.

  2. Wrong Part of Passage12% picked this

    Adaptation to cooked food limited the ability of humans to survive on

    This seems to just be grabbing words outside the Support Window. "High-meat diet" is discussed in the passage, but not in the second paragraph.

  3. Wrong Part of Passage6% picked this

    The evolution of the human digestive system is not

    This seems to just be grabbing ideas outside the Support Window. The 3rd paragraph discusses how it's harder to understand the evolution of the soft parts of the digestive system, but nothing about this is said in the second paragraph.

  4. Correct61% picked this

    Cooking methods changed and improved over

    Why this is right

    This is suggested by the sentence beginning "Subsequent". The authors were saying that cooking led to biological changes in tooth and jaw size, but we may see population variation in the extent and timing of this, since there was regional variation in the times when improvements in cooking technology were adopted. This sentence clearly establishes that cooking methods changed and improved over time (variation in when improvements in cooking were adopted). The part about "evolutionary time" is supported by the fact that the authors are saying that we'll see regional variations in the tooth and jaw reduction as a result of variations in improvements in cooking. Since these improvements are having evolutionary effects, it seems fair to say that they're changing over "evolutionary time".

    Skill tested: Inference · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

  5. Too Strong: same8% picked this

    Cooking was adopted by geographically diverse early human populations at the

    Nothing in this paragraph gets specific enough to justify the extreme claim that humans across the globe started cooking at the exact same time. Given that this paragraph describes regional variations in terms of when improvements in cooking technology were adopted, it seems reasonable to assume that there were probably also regional variations in terms of when cooking was adopted.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free