Aristophanes’ play The Clouds, which was written when the philosopher Socrates was in his mid-forties, portrays Socrates as an atheistic philosopher primarily concerned with issues in natural science. The only other surviving portrayals of Socrates were written after Socrates’ death at age 70. They portrayed Socrates as having a religious dimension and a strong focus on ethical issues.

"Surprising" Phenomenon

Portrayals of Socrates written after his life are markedly different than the one written during his life.

Objective

The right answer will be a hypothesis that explain why the portrayals of Socrates after his life attribute a religious and ethical dimension to his philosophy, whereas the contemporaneous one ascribes him a strictly atheistic, scientific outlook. We’re looking for something that either says the portrayals had different motivations, or that Socrates himself changes after his portrayal in Aristophanes.

A
Aristophanes’ portrayal of Socrates in The Clouds was unflattering, whereas the other portrayals were very flattering.

The portrayals are diametrically opposed. Whether or not they’re flattering doesn’t explain the vast differences in who they say Socrates really is.

B
Socrates’ philosophical views and interests changed sometime after his mid-forties.

Aristophanes portrays Socrates at age 40. If his views changed afterwards, and if those are the views he’s remembered best for, then it absolutely makes sense later portrayals would emphasize those. This explains the discrepancy in the stimulus.

C
Most of the philosophers who lived before Socrates were primarily concerned with natural science.

We don’t care about other philosophers. We need to know why later portrayals of Socrates differed from the contemporaneous one.

D
Socrates was a much more controversial figure in the years before his death than he was in his mid-forties.

We need to know more about Socrates as a controversial figure for this to be right. How did the controversy influence those later portrayals? Why were they so different than the one in Aristophanes? We simply don’t have enough information to choose this answer.

E
Socrates had an influence on many subsequent philosophers who were primarily concerned with natural science.

This doesn’t explain why Socrates was portrayed as an ethical and religious philosopher after his life. If this answer were true and he influenced philosophers concerned with natural science, why didn’t later accounts portray him as the scientific figure in Aristophanes?


4 comments

Many scientists believe that bipedal locomotion (walking on two feet) evolved in early hominids in response to the move from life in dense forests to life in open grasslands. Bipedalism would have allowed early hominids to see over tall grasses, helping them to locate food and to detect and avoid predators. However, because bipedalism also would have conferred substantial advantages upon early hominids who never left the forest—in gathering food found within standing reach of the forest floor, for example—debate continues concerning its origins. It may even have evolved, like the upright threat displays of many large apes, because it bettered an individual’s odds of finding a mate.

Summary
The stimulus discusses the evolution of bipedal locomotion (walking on two feet) in early hominids. It suggests that this evolution may have been triggered by the move from dense forests to open grasslands. Bipedalism would have helped early hominids see over tall grasses, locate food, and avoid predators. However, it also would have been advantageous in forests for gathering food within standing reach and possibly for improving mating chances. Because it conferred substantial advantages in many scenarios, debate continues about its precise origins.

Strongly Supported Conclusions
There is ongoing scientific debate concerning the origins of bipedalism.
Bipedalism aided early hominids in dense forests and open grasslands.

A
For early hominids, forest environments were generally more hospitable than grassland environments.
This comparative statement does not have any support. The stimulus only distinguishes between the two environments but does not say which one is more hospitable.
B
Bipedal locomotion would have helped early hominids gather food.
The stimulus says in two places that bipedalism helped early hominids gather food.
C
Bipedal locomotion actually would not be advantageous to hominids living in open grassland environments.
This is antisupported. The stimulus acknowledges that bipedalism conferred several advantages to those in grassland environments.
D
Bipedal locomotion probably evolved among early hominids who exclusively inhabited forest environments.
This is too strong to support. The stimulus does not answer where bipedal locomotion evolved and even acknowledges that debate continues surrounding its origins.
E
For early hominids, gathering food was more relevant to survival than was detecting and avoiding predators.
The stimulus identifies both gathering food and detecting/avoiding predators as advantages, but does not give one a preference over the other.

8 comments