PrepTest 113, Section 3, Question 20
One of the most vexing problems in historiography(65 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(9 more words not shown)
- AWe have no(20 more words not shown)
- BSome of the(27 more words not shown)
- CAttaching a reliable(17 more words not shown)
- DDetermining independently of(21 more words not shown)
- EThe soundest approach(25 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
One account says 1710; another says 1715. How do we decide which date to trust?
The proposed first step makes sense: examine the sources and eliminate less credible ones. If we began with ten conflicting accounts, perhaps that would leave only a few serious candidates. That doesn't guarantee one date remains, and taking an average wouldn't tell us when the event really occurred.
When several sources remain, historians may look beyond those usual sources for an independent way to decide which date is more likely. The passage explicitly says this sometimes fails. So the process can narrow the possibilities without always producing a reliable date.
What we’re looking for
For the most strongly supported inference, my initial thought is modest: sometimes historians still can't reliably date the event after trying.
Working the answers
- A
'Most' goes beyond the passage. We are told that this problem is vexing and that independent attempts sometimes fail, not that most investigated events lack even a plausible chronology. Several plausible dates could remain in a difficult case. Failing to determine one reliable date isn't the same as having no plausible candidate.
- BCorrect
Some events with conflicting chronologies remain without a reliable date despite historians' efforts. That follows the passage's explicit acknowledgment of unsuccessful attempts after less credible sources have been removed.
B doesn't require most dating attempts to fail. Nor do we have to predict that no future discovery could ever resolve a particular case. The supported point is the limited one: the attempts described don't always let historians date an event reliably.
- C
Not every event comes with several conflicting chronologies. Imagine an event whose credible records all agree on the date. Dating it wouldn't require choosing among competing accounts. The passage discusses what to do when conflict exists, not a requirement for dating every event.
- D
A method that sometimes fails isn't necessarily ineffective. It could work in many other cases. The author describes independent investigation as something historians may attempt and acknowledges occasional failure; that isn't an overall judgment that the approach doesn't work.
- E
Eliminating less credible sources isn't the same as trying to undermine as many sources as possible. A credible source could remain useful even if removing it made the disagreement smaller. E also calls its strategy the soundest approach, but the passage doesn't compare all approaches and establish a best one. It recommends narrowing the field, not discrediting sources simply to reduce their number.
More Must Be True questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Must Be True questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.