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. █████ ████ ███████ █████ ████ ██████ ██ ████ █████ █████ ████ ██ ███████ ███████████ ███ ████████ ██ ███████ ██████ █████ ███
Other People’s Argument ·Cooking didn’t lead to changes in human digestive anatomy
Author's Hypothesis ·Cooking evolutionarily changed human digestion
We evolved to efficiently digest high and densely caloric foods thanks to cooking. Now we are reliant on cooked foods and cannot survive on raw food alone.
Cooking resulted in decrease in tooth and jaw size. Evidence of cooking techniques developing and decreases in tooth and jaw size support the cooking hypothesis.
Anti-supported. How could the author think a raw-food diet is healthier if she also believes we typically can’t survive on a raw-food diet? Don’t bring in your own assumptions about the healthiness of raw food.
Not supported, because we simply have no evidence how long humans controlled fire before they started to cook. The author mentions that evidence of fire and “earth ovens” goes back more than 250,000 years. But did humans use fire long before cooking? We don’t know.
d
The practice of ██████ █ ████ ██ ██████ ████ ███ ███ ██████ ████████ █████ ██████ ████ ████ ██ ████ ██████████ █████████ ██████
Not supported, because the author never connects the widespread practice of eating cooked food to the beginning of sedentary lives. Although we a sedentary life is one of the unusual circumstances that might allow one to live on only raw food, there’s no other mention of sedentary lives.
Supported. Notice that the author says at the end of P2 that reductions in tooth and jaw size “may prove to result” from cooking. The author also states that evidence “suggests” eating cooked food caused tooth and jaw size reductions.
Difficulty
60% of people who answer get this correct
This is a difficult question.
It is similar in difficulty to other questions in this passage.
CURVE
Score of students with a 50% chance of getting this right
25%150
158
75%167
Analysis
Author’s perspective
Implied
Critique or debate
Phenomenon-hypothesis
Science
Answer Popularity
PopularityAvg. score
a
0%
154
b
26%
158
c
7%
159
d
6%
156
e
60%
164
Question history
You don't have any history with this question.. yet!
You've discovered a premium feature!
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.