BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

CR from OG-12

Expert replies
by crimson2283 » Wed Feb 09, 2011 7:15 pm
Some anthropologists study modern-day societies of foragers in an effort to learn about our ancient ancestors who were also foragers. A flaw in this strategy is that forager societies are extremely varied. Indeed, any forager society with which anthropologists are familiar has had considerable contact with modern non-forager societies.

Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the criticism made above of the anthropologists' strategy?

(A) All forager societies throughout history have had a number of important features in common that are absent from other types of societies.
(B) Most ancient forager societies either dissolved or made a transition to another way of life.
(C) All anthropologists study one kind or another of modern-day society.
(D) Many anthropologists who study modern-day forager societies do not draw inferences about ancient societies on the basis of their studies.
(E) Even those modern-day forager societies that have not had significant contact with modern societies are importantly different from ancient forager societies.

Can somebody please explain this?
Join the discussion
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

by DarkKnight » Wed Feb 09, 2011 8:07 pm
Is the answer A?
Join the discussion

by sallywoo » Wed Feb 09, 2011 10:00 pm
"A" because it shows that even though forager societies are varied, they all still have common, non-modern elements that lend themselves to study by anthropologists.
Join the discussion