Self-study
P1
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
Because cooking makes food easier to digest.
Counter Evidence ·
Humans generally cannot survive on only raw food
Too hard to digest.
Author's Position ·
Cooking is obligatory
Other People's Position Wrong ·
That there wasn't enough time for cooking to impact evolution
Evidence of cooking dates back at least 250k years.
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.
P2
█████████ █████████ █████████ █████ ██████████ ████ ██████ ███ ███████ ██ ██████ ██ ███████ ███ █████ ███
Question ·
Why can't humans digest raw foods?
Answer ·
Tooth and jaw too small
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.
Author's Hypothesis ·
Decrease in size occurred even earlier
Author suggests that Homo ergaster (1.9m years old) could have developed cooking which reduced their tooth and jaw sizes.
P3
███ █████████ ██ ████ █████ ██ ███ █████████ ██████ ██ ██████ ██ ███████████ ███████ ████ █████ ██ ██████ ███████ ███
Phenomenon ·
Evolution of our guts
Harder to explain owing to lack of fossil records.
Other People's Hypothesis ·
Human guts evolved to digest raw meats
Smaller gut volume; longer small intestine; smaller colon.
Author's Interpretation ·
But the differences also fit with the cooking hypothesis
These features of our guts also fits with the cooking hypothesis.
Future Research ·
More testing required to better understand raw v. cooked
Passage Style
Critique or debate
Phenomenon-hypothesis (RC)
20.
Which one of the following ████ ██████████ ██████ ███ ████ █████ ██ ███ ████████
a
Important questions about ███ ██████ ███ ██████ ██ ███████ ██ ███ ████ ███ ██████████ ██ ███████ ████████
This doesn’t capture the author’s view that humans have biologically adapted to eating cooked food. The author’s point isn’t that something is unresolved; it’s that there’s an answer to why humans can’t survive on raw food except in unusual circumstances.
b
Current evidence suggests ████ █████ ██████ ███ ████████████ ███████ ██ ███ █████████ ██ ██████ ██████ ████ ███ █████
This best captures the author’s point, which is expressed at
c
The reduction of █████ █████ ███ ███ ████ ████ ████████████ ████ ████████ ████████ ████ ██████ █████████ █ ██████ ██ █████ ███████ ███████
This doesn’t capture the author’s view that humans are biologically adapted to eating cooked food. The author’s point isn’t that we’ve had a change in dietary habits. It’s that changes in dietary habits (eating cooked instead of raw food) have affected our biology such that we can’t survive on raw food anymore except in special circumstances.
d
For at least ███████ ██████ ██████ ████ ████ ██████ █ ████ ████ ███████ ████████ ██████ █████
This may be supported, but it doesn’t capture the author’s view that humans are biologically adapted to eating cooked food. If the author advocates for a hypothesis, the main point should capture that hypothesis.
e
No special biological ███████████ ████ █████████ ███ ██████ ██ ███ ██████ █████ █████ ███████ █████ ████ ██████ ██ ████
This is stated by the author, but it’s not the main point, because it doesn’t capture the author’s view that humans are biologically adapted to eating cooked food. If the author advocates for a hypothesis, the main point should capture that hypothesis.