- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8950
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Fri Jul 19, 2013 11:00 pm
#33378
Complete Question Explanation
Method of Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (A)
This anthropologist points out that taboos exist in every human culture against eating certain types of animals. This has been attributed by some researchers to practical considerations; domestic animals were more valuable alive than as food, for example, so it would make sense not to eat them. The speaker disagrees with this notion, however, saying that the conclusion is unwarranted: There also exists, the anthropologist points out, the possibility that taboos appeared first, based on symbolic or ritualistic significance, and the animals that were not to be eaten were then used in other ways.
The question stem asks for the anthropologist’s method of reasoning. In this case, the anthropologist considers one hypothesis (that taboos against eating certain animals arose as a result of practical considerations) and is unconvinced, based on the existence of another possible explanation (that the taboos existed first, and the practical outcomes followed).
Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. As discussed, the anthropologist questions the practical explanation of taboos by pointing out a different explanation of the same evidence.
Answer choice (B): The anthropologist does not attempt to establish that the given explanation is false; the conclusion is that the explanation is unwarranted given at least one other possible explanation. This choice does not describe the author’s approach, so it cannot be the right answer to this Method of Reasoning question.
Answer choice (C): The author of the stimulus only asserts that the conclusion of some researchers is “unwarranted,” given the fact that the existence of taboos and their accompanying pragmatic applications “might have arisen” with the taboos appearing first, followed by people’s finding uses for the animals other than slaughter. The author doesn’t quite reject the researchers’ reasoning, nor does the author believe that the alternative explanation is necessarily more plausible, so this choice does not describe the anthropologist’s method of reasoning.
Answer choice (D): The author does not cite incompatible evidence in support of a conclusion. Instead, the author merely provides another possible explanation for the same evidence (the evidence being the existence of taboos against eating domestic animals, and the fact that such animals were used for purposes other than slaughter). This choice does not accurately describe the anthropologist’s method of reasoning, so it should be ruled out of contention.
Answer choice (E): The author suggests that there could be another explanation, but does not go so far as to argue that the alternative explanation is the right one, so this is not the method of reasoning reflected in the stimulus.
Method of Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (A)
This anthropologist points out that taboos exist in every human culture against eating certain types of animals. This has been attributed by some researchers to practical considerations; domestic animals were more valuable alive than as food, for example, so it would make sense not to eat them. The speaker disagrees with this notion, however, saying that the conclusion is unwarranted: There also exists, the anthropologist points out, the possibility that taboos appeared first, based on symbolic or ritualistic significance, and the animals that were not to be eaten were then used in other ways.
The question stem asks for the anthropologist’s method of reasoning. In this case, the anthropologist considers one hypothesis (that taboos against eating certain animals arose as a result of practical considerations) and is unconvinced, based on the existence of another possible explanation (that the taboos existed first, and the practical outcomes followed).
Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. As discussed, the anthropologist questions the practical explanation of taboos by pointing out a different explanation of the same evidence.
Answer choice (B): The anthropologist does not attempt to establish that the given explanation is false; the conclusion is that the explanation is unwarranted given at least one other possible explanation. This choice does not describe the author’s approach, so it cannot be the right answer to this Method of Reasoning question.
Answer choice (C): The author of the stimulus only asserts that the conclusion of some researchers is “unwarranted,” given the fact that the existence of taboos and their accompanying pragmatic applications “might have arisen” with the taboos appearing first, followed by people’s finding uses for the animals other than slaughter. The author doesn’t quite reject the researchers’ reasoning, nor does the author believe that the alternative explanation is necessarily more plausible, so this choice does not describe the anthropologist’s method of reasoning.
Answer choice (D): The author does not cite incompatible evidence in support of a conclusion. Instead, the author merely provides another possible explanation for the same evidence (the evidence being the existence of taboos against eating domestic animals, and the fact that such animals were used for purposes other than slaughter). This choice does not accurately describe the anthropologist’s method of reasoning, so it should be ruled out of contention.
Answer choice (E): The author suggests that there could be another explanation, but does not go so far as to argue that the alternative explanation is the right one, so this is not the method of reasoning reflected in the stimulus.