QUESTION TYPE: Paradox
PARADOX: Bigger primate groups usually spend more time grooming each other. This helps group cohesion.
Based on evidence from neocortex size, early human groups were quite large. But people didn’t groom each other apart from parents grooming children.
ANALYSIS: The main dilemma is explaining how early humans groups stayed cohesive. Grooming helps groups bond.
I had no idea how to prephrase this. So I just moved to the answers, keeping in mind that I had to explain how humans bonded.
The right answer shows that humans developed language, an even more effective way of bonding. So grooming became unnecessary for group cohesion.
- This doesn’t explain how human groups stayed cohesive.
- CORRECT. This shows that language let humans bond. So grooming was unnecessary, and presumably used only to keep people clean.
- This would show that it’s easier to keep humans clean. But, the main purpose of social grooming was to keep the group together. This doesn’t explain why humans didn’t need the bonding effect of grooming.
- This has nothing to do with grooming or bonding. We need an explanation for how human groups bonded.
- That’s nice. This doesn’t explain how human groups maintained cohesion.
Need help with LR? → Sign up hereTry the LSAT Hacks Course
Graeme teaches how to break down arguments, quickly