Q20 - One of the most vexing problems

[shaynfernandez]

One of the most frustrating things in MUST BE TRUE questions on the LSAT for me is the fact that sometimes it seems ok to assume and sometimes we are not allowed to assume.

B. Is really the only viable answer but I wouldn't say that it "Must Be True"

B.) Some of the events fro which there are conflicting chronologies and for which attempts have been made by historians to determine the right date cannot be dated reliably by historians.

I don't believe the stimulus tells us or gives us proof that these events CANNOT be dated, in other MUST BE TRUE types it seems like there is the scape goat of saying " we don't know that no historian could date these, we just know that these historians couldn't, maybe they are using the wrong method"

I don't know this answer just doesn't stick out to me as something that MUST BE TRUE, it seems like it COULD BE TRUE

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

One of the most frustrating things in MUST BE TRUE questions on the LSAT for me is the fact that sometimes it seems ok to assume and sometimes we are not allowed to assume.

This is one of the most frequently frustrating points in one's preparation for the LSAT. Let's take Inference questions and look at the 3 forms; Must be True, Most Strongly Supported, and Must be False. The issue you're having is that you're not distinguishing between the first and second form. There is a difference between finding an answer choice that Must be True and one that is Most Strongly Supported. On the latter, you do not need to prove the correct answer beyond a shadow of a doubt - it simply needs to be the answer choice that most reasonably follows from the stated claims.

We know that occasionally historians are unsuccessful in determining independently of the usual sources which of the competing dates is the correct one for an historical event - best expressed in answer choice (B).

Let's look at the incorrect answer choices:

(A) is too strong. We cannot say that this is true for "most" of the events for which attempts have been made to determine the right date.
(C) is unsupported, since the statements allow for the possibility that sometimes there are not conflicting dates for historical events.
(D) is too strong. We know that it is occasionally ineffective, but this answer choice simply blankets the strategy that is sometimes ineffective as ineffective in general.
(E) is unsupported. We know that such a method may perhaps be attempted, but we cannot say that it is the soundest method for dating an historical event.

Hope that helps!

[roflcoptersoisoi]

(A) Too strong and is not supported by the argument. There may be a plausible chronology for more than half to the events for which attempts have been made to find the right date.
(B) Looks good. We're told that historians on occasion have tried unsuccessfully determine the right date of usual sources.
(C) Tempting but too strong. The author makes a prescriptive statement, that: "less liable" sources SHOULD be eliminated to help determine the chronology on an event, but we have no idea if doing that is necessary to achieve the latter.
(D) We have no idea if it is an effective or ineffective way we aren't even told about other methods that are used to date events.
(E) Again we have no idea whether eliminating less credible sources is the soundest approach to dating an event, we're only told that this approach should be used to do so.

(B) is our only remaining answer and it is the correct one, the others are all completely wrong.

[dontmesswmeow]

Let me just piggyback but I think my point of view for the wrong answer (C) is kind of different from the earlier explanations by others.

In fact, I chose (C) at first and got the question wrong.

But now I see how (B) is correct and how (C) is wrong more clearly than before---after some re-readings.

(C) is wrong---more GLARINGLY because of two reasons from my view.

For one,

Simply, attaching a date to ANY event? is not the case that is addressed in the stimulus.

The author is addressing the issue of 'dating an event (specially) WHEN the usual sources offer conflicting chronologies of the event.

Not just any random events.

Second and lastly,

it is NOT required, in the stimulus, to determine which of the conflicting dates is most likely to be true if one is going to attach a reliable date to, say, an event.

In fact, as per the stimulus, historians MAY TRY to determine which date is 'MORE' LIKELY (not even most---here's another suspicious spot).

They may try to determine, but it is not that the dating REQUIRES such determination---as per my analysis.

Also, before that, there's kind of a thin mention of historian's obligation that they 'should attempt' to minimize the number of competing sources in the face of dating an event of conflicting chronologies. Still, it's not that determining which date is more likely to be right is required when you date, say, an event---you just should ATTEMPT to minimize the number of conflicting sources and MAY try to determine more likely one from those sources more credible.

----------
I found (B) hard to detect as a correct answer at first because I thought CANNOT is kind of overly strong assertion to be made on an LSAT choice.

However, now I see that there's this neutralizing word 'SOME.'

EVERY EVENTS of conflicting chronologies cannot be dated would be certainly strong enough to be provoking

and yet it's SOME ... cannot (while others CAN be reliably. as is mentioned in the stimulus as 'on occasion (historians's try to determine likely dates ARE actually) unsuccessful.'

Thanks!