Self-study
Until recently, anthropologists generally agreed that higher primates originated about 30 million years ago in the Al Fayyum region of Egypt. ████████ █ ███████████████████ ██████████ ████████ ██ █ █████ ███████ ██████████ ██ █████ ████ ██████ ████████ ██ ████ ███ ████ ██ ███████ ███ ██████ ████ ███ ████████ ██████ ████████ ██████████ ██ ██████ ████████ ███ █████ ██ ██████████ ███ ████████
Structure: Counter-Argument
The argument starts by telling us what anthropologists agreed on "until recently": higher primates originated about 30 million years ago in Egypt. We're then told that a 40-million-year-old piece of a lower jawbone found in Burma in 1978 has been used to question the original consensus and argue that higher primates originated in Burma. The author rejects this argument as "premature," and we're looking for an answer choice that will work as a premise supporting the author's position.
Strategy: Most Strongly Supported
For this fill-in-the-blank-style question, it's important to clarify what we need the correct answer choice to do. We know from the "for" in front of the blank that we're looking for a premise to support the author's conclusion that the claim about higher primates originating in Burma is "premature". For this to work, we're likely looking for a premise that explains why the 40-million-year-old jawbone fragment doesn't establish that higher primates originally emerged in Burma: perhaps the jawbone can't be reliably identified as belonging to a primate, or something like that.
4.
Which one of the following, ██ █████ ██ ███ ████ ███████ ██████████ ██ ███ █████████ ██████
a
there are no ████ ███████ ███████ ██ █████ ████ █████ ███ ██ █████
Incorrect. Remember that we're looking for an answer choice that will undermine the claim that higher primates originated in Burma, based on the evidence of the 40-million-year-old jawbone. The number of primate species there currently are in Burma versus Egypt isn't relevant.
b
several anthropologists, using █████████ ██████ ████████ █████████████ █████████ ███ █████████ ███ ██ ███ ███████ ████████
Incorrect. By suggesting the jawbone is in fact 40 million years old, (B) potentially strengthens the claim that higher primates originated in Burma. This is the opposite of what we want the correct answer choice to do.
c
higher primates cannot ██ ██████████ ██████ ██ █████ █████ ████████
Correct. (C) tells us that the jawbone fragment alone is not sufficient evidence to show that higher primates originated in Burma. Since this supports the author's claim that the pro-Burma argument is "premature," (C) fulfills the function we're looking for.
d
several prominent anthropologists ██ ███ ███████ ████ ██████ ████████ █████ ████ ██████████ ██ ██████ █████ ██ █████
Incorrect. Remember that the answer choice we expect will support the author's argument against the claim that higher primates originated in Burma, and that (given the structure of the argument so far), we specifically expect a premise that will undermine the power of the jawbone fragment as evidence for the Burma hypothesis. We don't expect the author to say anything about some anthropologists doubting both the Egypt and Burma theories, as (D) states.
e
other archaeological expeditions ██ █████ ████ █████████ ██████████████ ██████████ ████ █████████ ████ ███ ███████ █████ ████ ██ ███████ █████
Incorrect. This would support the claim that higher primates originated in Burma, not the author's rejection of that claim. So (E) doesn't fit what we're looking for.