LR Drill Set 5, Question 11
A Short Tract on First Principles is thought(50 more words not shown)
Each of the following, if(6 more words not shown)
- ANo other work(13 more words not shown)
- BThe Short Tract(10 more words not shown)
- CThe Short Tract(14 more words not shown)
- DThe Short Tract(15 more words not shown)
- EPayne is known(12 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Writing out a book isn't necessarily writing the book. “Written in the hand of” refers to handwriting. Suppose Hobbes composed the Short Tract and Payne copied it. The surviving pages could be in Payne's handwriting even though the ideas and wording were Hobbes's. That is the immediate problem with using the handwriting to identify the author.
We're asked for the choice that does not weaken the argument, so expect four ways to challenge Payne's authorship. One could support the copying possibility. Others might point toward Hobbes or make Payne a less plausible author. We shouldn't demand that all four take the same route.
What we’re looking for
Keep the conclusion in front of you: Payne was probably the author. For each answer, ask whether it gives us a reason to doubt that conclusion or its handwriting-based support. The odd choice will leave that reasoning intact or perhaps even help it.
Working the answers
- A
If no other work attributed to Payne has this intellectual depth, the Short Tract looks less typical of his work. That gives us some reason to doubt the attribution. It doesn't prove he couldn't have written something unusually deep, and it certainly doesn't establish that he lacked intelligence. But a marked difference from his other work still counts against the argument, so A is a weakener.
- B
A style resembling Hobbes's gives us evidence for the competing attribution. The handwriting might identify the person who copied these pages while the writing style reflects the person who composed the work. B doesn't conclusively establish Hobbes's authorship, but it makes the argument for Payne less secure.
- C
The work pursues a project associated with Hobbes: a mechanistic account of nature. That is another reason to consider Hobbes as the author. Someone else could share the project, of course, but the fit between the tract's purpose and Hobbes's ambition provides evidence that pushes against attributing it to Payne on handwriting alone.
- DCorrect
Claims in the tract conflict with claims in later works known to be Hobbes's. That does not give us a reason to doubt Payne's authorship. If anything, it can cast doubt on the competing Hobbes attribution. Hobbes might have changed his mind, so D doesn't prove he wasn't the author, and ruling him out wouldn't by itself prove Payne wrote it. But we only need the choice that fails to weaken the argument. D fits that task.
- E
This makes our copying possibility concrete. Payne actually worked as a copyist and translator of other people's work, so finding a text in his handwriting needn't identify him as its author. He could have been preserving or translating someone else's writing. E attacks the exact move from handwriting to authorship and is therefore a weakener, not our EXCEPT answer.
More Weaken questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Weaken questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.