PrepTest 23, Section 3, Question 7
One researcher writes, "Human beings are innately aggressive." As evidence, the researcher cites the prevalence of warfare in history, and then discounts any current disinclination to fight: "The most peaceable peoples of today were often ravagers of yesteryear and will probably fight again in the future." But if some peoples are peaceable now, then aggression itself cannot be coded in our genes, only the potential for it. If "innate" only means possible, or even likely in certain environments, then everything we do is innate and the word has no meaning.
One researcher writes, "Human beings are innately aggressive." As evidence, the researcher cites the prevalence of warfare in history, and then discounts any current disinclination to fight: "The most peaceable peoples of today were often ravagers of yesteryear and will probably fight again in the future." But if some peoples are peaceable now, then aggression itself cannot be coded in our genes, only the potential for it. If "innate" only means possible, or even likely in certain environments, then everything we do is innate and the word has no meaning.
One researcher writes, "Human beings are innately aggressive." As evidence, the researcher cites the prevalence of warfare in history, and then discounts any current disinclination to fight: "The most peaceable peoples of today were often ravagers of yesteryear and will probably fight again in the future." But if some peoples are peaceable now, then aggression itself cannot be coded in our genes, only the potential for it. If "innate" only means possible, or even likely in certain environments, then everything we do is innate and the word has no meaning.
One researcher writes, "Human beings are innately aggressive." As evidence, the researcher cites the prevalence of warfare in history, and then discounts any current disinclination to fight: "The most peaceable peoples of today were often ravagers of yesteryear and will probably fight again in the future." But if some peoples are peaceable now, then aggression itself cannot be coded in our genes, only the potential for it. If "innate" only means possible, or even likely in certain environments, then everything we do is innate and the word has no meaning.
Which one of the following most accurately describes the technique used in the passage to weaken the argument for the claim that aggressiveness is innate to human beings?
The accuracy of the historical data cited in the argument for innate aggressiveness is called into question.
The force of the concept of innateness used in the argument for innate aggressiveness is called into question.
An attempt is made to undermine the argument for innate aggressiveness by arguing that there are no genetically based traits.
An attempt is made to undermine the argument for innate aggressiveness by suggesting that it appeals to emotional considerations rather than to reason.
An attempt is made to undermine the argument for innate aggressiveness by arguing that all peoples are peaceable.
0 Comments