to the top

#5- Many scientists believe that bipedal locomotion

htngo12
LSAT Leader
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu May 19, 2016 4:59 pm
Points: 25

Hi!

For this MBT, C&E question, the stim presents that many scientists believe bipedal locomotion evolved in early hominids to move from life in dense forests to open grasslands) :
MFDF to OG caused BLM.

Then the author states BLM would have allowed to see over tall grasses in OG to locate food and avoid/detect predators. He also states that this would have been an advantage for the hominids that did not leave DF. So the debate continues.

Then author say it may have evolved like an example of many large apes that develop BLM due to finding a mate (so not due to food):
FM caused BLM (in apes)

I originally picked C but then realized after analyzing the stim that BLM would been advantageous for both.

Now that I see B) BLM would have helped early hominids gather food as the correct answer choice due to the Fact test.

I guess I probably got confused when the last sentence gave an alternative C for the effect. Sprouting from my thought process that there may be another reason for BLM.

Was the last sentence there to confuse me?
Francis O'Rourke
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 474
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2017 2:44 pm
Points: 469

Hi Ht,

It’s difficult to read into the minds of the test makers here. It’s possible they thought that the stimulus would have been too straightforward without the inclusion of the last sentence. It’s also possible that they were trying their best to present a realistic anthropological statement. Like every other question on the LSAT, it tests your ability to digest dense information; that will be confusing for everyone at some time or another :)

Sentences that have no or little bearing on the selection of the correct answer choice - like the last sentence of the stimulus above - do come up fairly regularly. They definitely make the question more difficult if you try to incorporate every premise presented, so you have to ask yourself if or how that statement affects the fact set that you have.

The author already stated that bipedalism would have helped hominids gather food in each environment, so whether or not bipedalism has reproductive advantages wouldn’t change that fact that bipedalism is useful for food gathering at all, no matter what the true cause of bipedalism is.
htngo12
LSAT Leader
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu May 19, 2016 4:59 pm
Points: 25

Good point on taking the statement and seeing how it affects the information in the stim to recheck answers!