Reading comp PrepTest 147 · Section 2 · Question 16

Passage

  It is generally accepted that woodland clearings were utilized by Mesolithic human populations (populations in Europe roughly 7,000 to 12,000 Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Social Science


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • Common theory (Mesolithic humans cleared woods to hunt) and the author's rebuttal (circumstantial evidence)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Common theory:
      • Early humans used clearings for food/economic uses, either by making them or using found ones (first and second sentences)
    • Author's view:
      • The common theory is unlikely, as its supporting evidence is "at best circumstantial" (third sentence)
    • List of reasons evidence is circumstantial, according to the author:
      • Clearings and tools are not securely linked (fourth sentence)
      • No artifacts found suggest these humans used animals (last sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "at best circumstantial" (third sentence); "never securely linked" (fourth sentence); "generally lacking" (last sentence)

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • Author previewing support for new theory (the common theory relies on ethnographic evidence, but ethnographic evidence can also support a different view)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Comparison between common theory and new theory's ethnographic evidence, according to the author:
      • The common theory's support comes from the realization that premodern humans used fire to make grazing areas, but other ethnographic evidence could also support the view that the clearings were used for noneconomic purposes (first and last sentences)
    • Author's attitude: "may suggest" (third sentence)

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Author's support (Tuan's argument that human behavior has been driven by fear of wilderness)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Yi-Fu Tuan's view:
      • Until recently, humans have been afraid of the wilderness (first sentence)
    • Author's view:
      • Applying this to Mesolithic humans, we can form a new theory for use of woodland clearings (last sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "might be tempted" (second sentence); "it is clear" (second sentence); "may change" (last sentence)

Paragraph 4

  • Paragraph note
    • Author's support (recent awareness of the importance of woodland paths for early humans) and hypothesis (Mesolithic humans may have created paths due to fear of wilderness)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Author's hypothesis:
      • Fear of woodlands motivated the creation of woodland paths in the Mesolithic era (last sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "propose" (last sentence); "the primary motivators in establishing paths may have been" (last sentence)

Paragraph 5

  • Paragraph note
    • Implications of the author's hypothesis
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • List of implications of the author's hypothesis:
      • Mesolithic humans created paths, which became permanent fixtures (second sentence)
      • The paths became the areas in which human activity occurred, and the areas outside the paths became "the wilderness" for Mesolithic humans (third and fourth sentences)
      • So, these clearings can be considered "social phenomena," as humans used the paths and the paths became wider (last sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "may be" (first sentence); "allows us to legitimately consider" (fourth sentence); "may lead us" (last sentence); "purely social phenomena" (last sentence)

Main Point: While it's generally accepted that Mesolithic humans used woodland clearings for food/economic purposes, recent evidence suggests that these clearings may have been created out of fear of the wilderness and developed for social reasons.

Key Lines?

Lines 1-4; Line 8 - The common theory is described

Lines 9-10 - Author's initial rebuttal

Lines 28-30 - Viewpoint that supports an alternative hypothesis

Lines 39-41 - Author's evidence for an alternative hypothesis

Lines 41-45 - Author's alternative hypothesis

Meta-Structure?

Proposing a Hypothesis: This is one of those passages that could be described by any number of Meta-Structures. Phenomenon/Explanation, Old Approach/New Approach, Correcting the Record, Rebutting Critics ... all of these could describe this passage's structure. If you went with any of these Meta-Structures, you would probably reach similar conclusions about this passage's main point and purpose.

Ultimately, we think Proposing a Hypothesis is the best fit for this passage. It doesn't hurt that the author calls their new explanation of the Mesolithic woodland clearings a "hypothesis" (Line 46). Moreover, we should note how circumspect the author's language is — "may change" (Line 35), "propose" (Line 41); "may have been" (Lines 42-43), "may be" (Line 46); "allows us to legitimately consider" (Line 51); "may force us" (Line 53); "may lead us" (Line 54). This wishy-washy language is a hallmark of Proposing a Hypothesis passages. The author isn't certain that their explanation is correct. Instead, the author proposes a new explanation they think might be better supported by the evidence.

In a Proposing a Hypothesis passage, the hypothesis is generally the main point. We'll have to also make sure the cautious language is part of the main point, though. So, we identified the main point as: "While it's generally accepted that Mesolithic humans used woodland clearings for food/economic purposes, recent evidence suggests that these clearings may have been created out of fear of the wilderness and developed for social reasons."

Last Thoughts?

This passage is difficult because it throws a lot of information around and seems a bit convoluted. However, it actually has a well-defined structure — you just need to find how the ideas connect to each other! This is difficult because ideas are brought up in one paragraph but only referenced several paragraphs later.

However, remembering the Meta-Structure can help here, as we know that the passage is, overall, designed to advance an alternative hypothesis to a commonly accepted theory. This hypothesis is referenced at the beginning of Paragraph 2, but we don't get the alternative hypothesis for the clearings until much later, in Paragraph 4.

In the interim, we get ideas that build on each other, but not explicitly. Paragraph 2 also talks about ethnographic information supporting an alternative theory. That ethnographic information is raised in Paragraph 3 without being explicitly referred to as such. And the author then pivots to a new topic in Paragraph 4 before circling back and connecting Paragraph 3's ethnographic information to it.

In short, the passage previews later claims and builds off of itself, but in an unclear manner. Remember, though, that the LSAT isn't going to throw a disjointed passage at you, as it can't really ask questions about something that doesn't make much sense. So when it feels disjointed, dig in to see how the ideas are connected — you're probably missing some implicit connections.

Question prompt

According to the resource-procurement Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: B

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Social Science

Strategy Overview

Refer to notes or what you highlighted/underlined to locate where the old theory discusses Mesolithic humans and their practices, and refer to the relevant part of the passage as needed to find that answer choice that must be true

Answer Anticipation

For questions that ask us to find a specific detail mentioned in the passage, quickly finding and reviewing that piece of information is paramount. That is why we make brief notes describing the role of each paragraph and highlight or underline definitions and the minor Meta-Structures — doing so helps us find the salient information efficiently and reliably. Once we review that part of the passage, we can look through the answer choices to see which one is best supported by what we reviewed.Here, the question asks what the old theory ("the resource-procurement model," per this question stem) says about Mesolithic humans and their practices. Where did that show up in the passage? According to our notes, the passage discusses the old theory most extensively in the first paragraphs. (Although the theory appears in both Paragraphs 1 and 2, Paragraph 2 focused on the evidence in favor of it instead of what it said, so we can focus on Paragraph 1.)In the first paragraph, we can see that the theory is a bit uncertain about what exactly humans used the pathways for. There was either the "deliberate removal of tree cover to attract grazing animals" (Lines 5-6) or "opportunistic hunting" in natural clearings (Lines 6-7). In both cases, though, the Mesolithic humans were using these clearings as a source of food procurement involving animals, so we know the old theory argued that hunting was happening in these pathways. Let's find an answer backing that up.

Answer choices

  1. A
    They traveled on preestablished Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) Does this answer choice say that the old theory held that hunting occurred on these pathways?

    Nope. So, we should squash any urge to check the passage and eliminate this answer choice.

    If we had to review the passage for this answer choice, we'd find the author says we recently discovered that Mesolithic humans traveled on preestablished pathways (Line 39-41). The resource-procurement model isn't a recent theory. This further confirms that this answer choice is incorrect.

  2. B
    They hunted animals that Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B matches the stem

    (B) Does this answer choice say that the old theory held that hunting occurred on these pathways?

    Yes, it does, folks. The resource-procurement model says that these clearings were either created to attract animals or were natural clearings that attracted animals (Lines 5-7). In either case, the Mesolithic humans used these animals for food procurement — aka, hunting. This answer is therefore correct.

  3. C
    They grazed domesticated animals Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    (C) Does this answer choice say that the old theory held that hunting occurred on these pathways?

    Nope, so we can cross (C) off. Besides, the passage discusses grazing animals, but it says these clearings might have been created to attract grazing animals (Lines 5-6). So, this answer reflects only one of the old theory's two possibilities. Therefore, we can't say the old theory definitely thinks humans used the pathways to attract grazing animals. Moreover, if you're attracting grazing animals, the animals are wild — they're not yet domesticated.

  4. D
    They used clearings as Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    (D) Does this answer choice say that the old theory held that hunting occurred on these pathways?

    Again, no. We shouldn't check the passage to see if we missed this. Instead, let's eliminate it.

    If we had to check the passage, we'd notice that this answer lines up more with the alternative theory that saw these clearings being used for social purposes, including "resting."

  5. E
    They planted crops in Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    (E) Does this answer choice say that the old theory held that hunting occurred on these pathways?

    Negative. Let's cross off (E). And besides, the resource-procurement model may focus on food, but it discusses only animals, not crops.

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A 16%
  2. B Credited 61%
  3. C 13%
  4. D 8%
  5. E 3%

Deeper help

Ask follow-ups on any step

Optional AI tutor mode will let you interrogate assumptions, compare answers, and drill weak patterns without leaving the page.

Human-written explanations stay primary; AI is an add-on when you want it.

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion