Payal Tandon
Co-founder, e-GMAT
Welcome to e-GMAT Support!
I am Payal, Co-Founder of e-GMAT.
Feel free to ask any Query.
Thank you for your query.
We will be contacting you soon on

Psychologist: Early humans lived primarily in small bands. As a result, humans today….

A 3 min read

Psychologist: Early humans lived primarily in small bands. As a result, humans today are naturally adapted to group interactions. Hence, social connections and participation in the community are necessary to maintain good emotional health.

Which of the following is an assumption the psychologist’s argument requires?

  • A. Studies have found that people who have strong social connections tend to have better emotional health as well.
  • B. Early humans had better emotional health, on average, than humans do today.
  • C. Participation in the community always involves group interactions similar to those to which humans are naturally adapted
  • D. Human emotional health depends at least in part on living in conditions to which humans are naturally adapted
  • E. Humans should live in the social conditions that are necessary for maintaining good emotional health

Solution

Passage Analysis:

Text from PassageAnalysis
Early humans lived primarily in small bands.What it says: Our ancestors lived in small groups rather than large societies
What it does: Sets up the historical foundation for the argument
What it is: Historical fact presented by the psychologist
As a result, humans today are naturally adapted to group interactions.What it says: Because of our small-band history, we’re naturally wired for group settings
What it does: Connects our evolutionary past to our current nature and abilities
What it is: Psychologist’s interpretation of evolutionary adaptation
Hence, social connections and participation in the community are necessary to maintain good emotional health.What it says: We need social bonds and community involvement to stay emotionally healthy
What it does: Draws the final conclusion from our evolutionary adaptation to group life
What it is: Psychologist’s main conclusion

Argument Flow:

“The psychologist starts with a historical fact about early human living arrangements, then explains how this shaped our evolution, and finally concludes what this means for our emotional well-being today.”

Main Conclusion:

“Social connections and community participation are necessary for good emotional health.”

Logical Structure:

“The argument flows from evolutionary history → current human nature → requirements for emotional health. The psychologist assumes that our evolutionary adaptation to small groups directly translates into a modern requirement for social connections to maintain emotional wellness.”

Prethinking:

Question type:

Assumption – We need to find what must be true for the psychologist’s conclusion to hold. This means identifying gaps in reasoning that need to be filled for the argument to work.

Precision of Claims

The argument makes qualitative claims about human adaptation (‘naturally adapted’), necessity claims (‘necessary to maintain’), and causal connections between evolutionary history and current emotional health needs.

Strategy

We’ll look for ways the conclusion could fall apart even if we accept the given facts. The psychologist jumps from ‘humans are adapted to group interactions’ to ‘social connections are necessary for emotional health.’ We need to find what missing links would make this conclusion fail if they weren’t true.

Answer Choices Explained

A. Studies have found that people who have strong social connections tend to have better emotional health as well.

This talks about studies showing a correlation between social connections and better emotional health. However, the psychologist doesn’t base the argument on empirical studies – the reasoning flows from evolutionary adaptation to necessity for emotional health. While supportive evidence would be nice, it’s not what the argument requires to be logically sound. The psychologist’s reasoning stands or falls on the logical connection between adaptation and health requirements, not on studies.

B. Early humans had better emotional health, on average, than humans do today.

This compares early humans’ emotional health to modern humans’ emotional health. But the psychologist’s argument doesn’t depend on early humans being healthier – it only requires that our evolutionary past shaped our current needs. The argument is about what modern humans need (based on how we evolved), not about whether our ancestors were better off than us.

C. Participation in the community always involves group interactions similar to those to which humans are naturally adapted

This statement is too strong and specific. It says community participation ‘always’ involves the exact same type of group interactions we’re adapted to. The psychologist’s argument doesn’t require this level of precision – it just needs some meaningful connection between our group adaptations and modern social needs. The word ‘always’ makes this unnecessarily restrictive.

D. Human emotional health depends at least in part on living in conditions to which humans are naturally adapted

This is exactly what we need! The psychologist jumps from ‘we’re naturally adapted to group interactions’ straight to ‘social connections are necessary for emotional health.’ This jump only works if we assume that our emotional health actually depends on living according to our natural adaptations. Without this assumption, being adapted to something wouldn’t necessarily mean we need it for good health. This bridges the critical gap in the reasoning.

E. Humans should live in the social conditions that are necessary for maintaining good emotional health

This is about what humans ‘should’ do – a prescriptive statement about how we ought to live. But the psychologist’s argument is descriptive, explaining what is necessary for emotional health based on our evolutionary background. The conclusion is about necessity for health, not about moral obligations or what we should do.

About The Author