It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
“Some anthropologists argue that the human species could not have survived prehistoric times if the species had not evolved the ability to cope with diverse natural environments. However, there is considerable evidence that Australopithecus afarensis, a prehistoric species related to early humans, also thrived in a diverse array of environments, but became extinct. Hence, the anthropologists’ claim is false.“
Could someone please show me verbatim how to diagram the entire passage Via formal logic and cross reference the mismatched terms that the author used in order to draw the false inference. According to the question it is a mistaken reversal and I am very comfortable diagraming up until the term “however”, after that I got so confused as to what the author was trying to translate.
Now if I’m not mistaken Jy mentioned that because the the author concluded that “the anthropologist Claims were false
ANTHRO CLAIM
“If survive ———-> Cope”
AUTHOR CONCLUSION
“Not survival ——-> Not Cope”
Are those the 2 conditional statements that conflict, that make this entire passage a mistaken reversal ?
Also please keep in mind I kind of dis regarded the premise right above the conclusion because the verbiage is confusing as it doesn’t appear to be a conditional statement that I can diagram