Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Apply for Membership

Categories

I didn't get this question quite well.

yinyinxuyinyinxu Member
in Logical Reasoning 23 karma
I thought the conclusion should be the natural process study doesn't need plentiful of resources as the study and discoveries started under the condition of drought and hunger
Show Related Discussions

Comments

  • yinyinxuyinyinxu Member
    23 karma
    Anyone can help to explain?
  • brna0714brna0714 Alum Inactive ⭐
    1489 karma
    Do you mean PT 19, Section 2, Question 17?
  • brna0714brna0714 Alum Inactive ⭐
    edited August 2015 1489 karma
    The confusion in this question comes from distinguishing what the author has stated and the claims of "some anthropologists." The first sentence is stated by the author and is meant to be accepted as fact. We know that in 100% of cases study of natural processes requires leisure and leisure requires plentiful (not scarce) resources.

    Additionally, we're told that the complex discoveries of early societies required the study of natural processes. This triggers the chain mentioned above (study --> leisure --> plentiful resources) and that's how we're able to prove answer choice C.

    Essentially, the idea about drought and hunger is offered as background information meant to confuse you.

    Hope that helps!
  • yinyinxuyinyinxu Member
    23 karma
    Thank you so much!! a lot help!
Sign In or Register to comment.