PrepTest 94+, Section 4, Question 6
Anthropologist: During the last ice age, nomadic communities probably needed at least 15 or 20 members to survive, and they were generally not much larger than this. Ice-age nomads are commonly portrayed as primarily big-game hunters, but most of their food must have in fact come from other sources, such as small game and plants. Hunting large animals is a dangerous activity that would have risked the lives of several members of the community.
Anthropologist: During the last ice age, nomadic communities probably needed at least 15 or 20 members to survive, and they were generally not much larger than this. Ice-age nomads are commonly portrayed as primarily big-game hunters, but most of their food must have in fact come from other sources, such as small game and plants. Hunting large animals is a dangerous activity that would have risked the lives of several members of the community.
Anthropologist: During the last ice age, nomadic communities probably needed at least 15 or 20 members to survive, and they were generally not much larger than this. Ice-age nomads are commonly portrayed as primarily big-game hunters, but most of their food must have in fact come from other sources, such as small game and plants. Hunting large animals is a dangerous activity that would have risked the lives of several members of the community.
Anthropologist: During the last ice age, nomadic communities probably needed at least 15 or 20 members to survive, and they were generally not much larger than this. Ice-age nomads are commonly portrayed as primarily big-game hunters, but most of their food must have in fact come from other sources, such as small game and plants. Hunting large animals is a dangerous activity that would have risked the lives of several members of the community.
Which one of the following most accurately describes the role played in the argumentation by the statement that ice-age nomads are commonly portrayed as primarily big-game hunters?
It is a premise used as support for the overall conclusion of the anthropologist's argument.
It is a clarification of one of the premises of the anthropologist's argument.
It is an objection that the anthropologist raises against an opposing theory.
It is the overall conclusion of the anthropologist's argument.
It describes a claim that the anthropologist attempts to refute.
0 Comments