Q17 - Archeologist: The mosaics that

[adarsh.murthy]

I am trying to make sense of A. I got to A by POE, but I am not sure how it, when assumed, helps the arguement. The only consideration with respect to the question(whetehr the mosaics..)is archaelogical: so waht? The point is that removing the mosaics misleads future archaelogists who have no access to records. How can I negate this option?would it be:.. is not the only consideration?

Thanks for your thoughts!

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Thanks for bringing this one to the forum!

Let's start with the question stem. While it has many similarities with an Assumption question, this is actually a Strengthen question. That means that there's no need to negate the answer choice to verify whether it was necessary to the argument. The question does not ask for something necessarily assumed in the argument - just something that makes the conclusion more likely to be true based on the evidence.

The conclusion of the argument is that the mosaics should have been left in the now flooded town. The evidence for this is that we don't need them to draw archeological conclusions, and that future archeologists may be misled by their absence.

Both of these premises appeal to archeologists, but what about others who might want to have access to the mosaics. A mosaic is a piece of art, and I'd have to imagine that people in the art world, who may not be making archeological conclusions may also be interested in viewing these mosaics, both for pleasure and possibly for academic study. There are simply too many other reasons besides drawing archeological conclusions that we may want to have access to these works.

To support the conclusion that we should have left the mosaics where they were answer choice (A) is great, for it limits our potential use of these works to the issues addressed in the evidence and rules out the other considerations the evidence forgot to consider.

Let's look at the incorrect answers:

(B) helps to establish that future archeologists would be able to determine that the works had been submerged in a flood, but just because they're able to make this determination doesn't justify actually leaving them there.
(C) similar to answer choice (B), this answer tells us what is/is not the case, but it doesn't get at what we want to do. The conclusion is a recommendation and so we want an answer choice to tell us what's good or bad, not simply what is.
(D) goes against the argument that future archeologists might be misled by the absence of the mosaics and so undermines, rather than supports, the conclusion.
(E) eliminates a reason against removing the mosaics and so undermines the conclusion - though just a little.

Hope that helps!

[coco.wu1993]

I think Justify questions should be treated as Sufficient Assumption questions. With the justification provided, the conclusion is guaranteed to be true. However, this question says the opposite. Thanks in advance for help!

[tommywallach]

Hey Coco,

As Matt said, this is a strengthen question. Do you disagree?

-t

[mimimimi]

I think Justify questions should be treated as Sufficient Assumption questions. With the justification provided, the conclusion is guaranteed to be true. However, this question says the opposite. Thanks in advance for help!

I think the key words here are "help to justify" so it is actually a strengthen question. I was confused by the question stem as well, and I hope this will help!

[smsotolongo]

Thanks for bringing this one to the forum!

Let's start with the question stem. While it has many similarities with an Assumption question, this is actually a Strengthen question.

Wow that was easy. Since it said "assumed" I took it as an assumption question without realizing it says "most" and "justify" which means strengthen. Now as a strengthen it's pretty easy to see why A is that answer. Thanks.

[asafezrati]

(C) similar to answer choice (B), this answer tells us what is/is not the case, but it doesn't get at what we want to do. The conclusion is a recommendation and so we want an answer choice to tell us what's good or bad, not simply what is.

The Strengthen type of questions allow alot of flexibility, so I think that "what is the case" can support "what should be done".

So I don't understand why C is wrong. Is it a premise booster (future arch. might be misled by their absence)?

[Mab6q]

Thanks for bringing this one to the forum!

Let's start with the question stem. While it has many similarities with an Assumption question, this is actually a Strengthen question.

Wow that was easy. Since it said "assumed" I took it as an assumption question without realizing it says "most" and "justify" which means strengthen. Now as a strengthen it's pretty easy to see why A is that answer. Thanks.

I choose C on my first go at this question as well, however I think C, if anything, might weaken the argument. The conclusion is that we should have left them there because of future archaeologist being misled. C tells us that the materials that are used to make mosaics are apparent, so you could possibly determine based on the fact that there are material that there was a mosaic there. So, we wouldn't need the actually mosaic to make that conclusion.

A is tough because it's worded like a close but no cigar sufficient assumption answer, but we have to remember that is a strengthen question.

[ganbayou]

Does this Archaeologist claim that the mosaics should have been left in the flood?? (it would be lost then)
When I was reading the stimulus I was wondering why he/she claims like that or I misunderstood the stimulus?

Thanks,

[aescano209]

Does this Archaeologist claim that the mosaics should have been left in the flood?? (it would be lost then)
When I was reading the stimulus I was wondering why he/she claims like that or I misunderstood the stimulus?

Thanks,

Yes, the author's conclusion here is they should have left the mosaics in the city that is flooded now. The reason he says that is they already have all the arch. conclusions they need and if future arch. were to get there they might be misled. The issue with this is that author is only concerned with arch. and their concerns only. It could very well be that maybe an artist wants to analyze the patterns or inherent emotional appeal or whatever. But that is the issue, the author assumes that there is no other reason as to having taken the mosaics out of the ancient city. This is found in answer choice A by stating that there isn't any other considerations, this will make his/her conclusion more likely to be true. Seems kind of selfish of him/her to have said that right?

[donghai819]

(A) is correct probably because there might be another considerations to demolish this site, such as fishing farm, scientific test, or any other reasonable staff, to which the site might be a obstacle. (A) rules out these possibilities, so (A) serves well.