PrepTest 104, Section 2, Question 25
In The Dynamics of Apocalypse, John Lowe attempts(441 more words not shown)
It can be inferred from(25 more words not shown)
- Adaringly innovative but(1 more words not shown)
- Bgenerally accepted but(1 more words not shown)
- Cvery reliable but(1 more words not shown)
- Dunscientific but(1 more words not shown)
- Eunconventional but(1 more words not shown)
Reading the passage
Lowe's approach seems reasonable, but we aren't sure it reconstructs events accurately. The question is specifically about his method for building the chronology, so we should check what the text says about using dated monuments—not just borrow the overall tone toward his theory.
Working the answers
- A
“Daringly innovative” doesn't fit. Paragraph 1 says Lowe relies on dated monuments “Like previous investigators.” We don't need to settle how harsh “flawed” sounds; the supposed novelty already fails.
- BCorrect
“Like previous investigators” supports calling the method generally accepted. The final paragraph makes it questionable: a city might have remained occupied after monument construction stopped, so those dates might not mark the end of occupation as Lowe assumes.
- C
We are given a reason to doubt its reliability, and nothing says the method is outdated or has been replaced by a better one.
- D
The writer doesn't call it unscientific. Its uncertainty comes from the limits of the available evidence, not a rejection of archaeology as a legitimate method.
- E
Using an approach shared by earlier investigators doesn't support “unconventional.” Nor does the writer describe the method as brilliant.
More Author's Opinion questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Author's Opinion questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.