PrepTest 158

This answer choice has no effect on this argument. Even if some ancient cultures engaged in agriculture before burning wide swaths of land, that isn't necessarily the "large-scale agriculture" this argument discusses. Moreover, even if this were true, it wouldn't show that this ancient society in question was still a hunter-gatherer society.

Sure, hunter-gatherers may need fire for these reasons, but why would they need to burn "large areas of land" to cook or warm themselves? It seems much more practical to use small fires for both of these purposes. In brief, this answer choice may show why this society needed fire, but not the large-scale fires required to burn large tracts of land.

Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen

Stimulus Summary:
An ancient society burned large tracts of land, and some think that marked the beginning of agriculture in that society. But we don't see evidence of cultivation after the fires. So they were probably still hunter-gatherers.

Strategy Overview:

1. Argument or facts? Always argument, so identify premises and conclusions of argument
2. Anticipate why the premises are not enough to show that the conclusion is true
   1. Causal argument? Look for answer choice that:
      1. Rules out possible alternate cause
      2. Shows same cause, same effect
      3. Shows no cause, no effect
      4. Shows the cause and effect are not reversed
   2. If not causal argument, anticipate ways to fix problem with argument
3. Use anticipations to select the answer choice that, if true, would strengthen argument

Answer Anticipation:
On Strengthen questions, the correct answer usually helps fix a flaw in the argument. This is why experienced LSATers try to identify the problems with the argument first. Once they identify the problem, they're better prepared to find the answer choice that fixes that problem and strengthens the argument.

On this argument, attentive LSATers would notice the specific conclusion the author draws. The author concludes that this ancient society is probably still a hunter-gatherer society. However, can this author be confident this is the case? Even if this society is not yet a full-bore agricultural society, that doesn't mean it's probably a hunter-gatherer society. After all, what use would a hunter-gatherer society have with massive fires? Assuming this society is not full of arson-loving teenaged boys, what purpose could these large-scale fires serve?

So we can fix this argument — and thereby strengthen it — by providing a reason why a hunter-gatherer society might burn vast land areas.

Answer Choice Explanation:
This answer choice strengthens the argument by showing why hunter-gatherers would need to clear land with fire: to move herds of animals and (presumably) make it easier to hunt them. Unlike (B) or (C), this answer choice points to a purpose a hunter-gatherer society would have not just for fires but for large-scale, land-clearing fires. If we added this back to the argument, the author's conclusion would seem more convincing, and it is the correct answer.

Key Takeaway:
Taking careful note of the argument's assertions and being precise with our anticipations helps us avoid tricky, incorrect answer choices. Several incorrect answer choices provided a reason why a hunter-gatherer society would use fire. But only the correct answer gave a reason why such a society would use fire to burn a large tract of land.

Although this suggests the ancient society was probably not aware of the nutrient-enriching benefit of burning land, it doesn't necessarily undermine the claim that they were burning land for agriculture. A society can do something even it is unaware of all the benefits of doing that thing. This answer choice doesn't explain why a hunter-gatherer society would burn a tract of land. Consequently, it doesn't strengthen the author's conclusion.