PrepTest 119, Section 2, Question 24
It is now clear that the ancient Egyptians(68 more words not shown)
The reasoning above is most(10 more words not shown)
- AIt makes a(17 more words not shown)
- BIt uses the(14 more words not shown)
- CIt presumes, without(24 more words not shown)
- DIt ignores the(17 more words not shown)
- EIt provides no(14 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
The oldest cup we've found isn't necessarily the first drink anyone made.
The Egyptian cup is useful evidence. It dates to 2000 B.C., earlier than the stated Babylonian evidence, and its residue indicates that it held beer. That gives us a reason to reconsider the old account. But why declare the search finished?
Maybe another society made alcohol earlier and left no surviving artifacts. People could have been making it long before the oldest object archaeologists happen to discover. Missing evidence of earlier production doesn't establish that no earlier production occurred.
There's also a smaller question about the Babylonian date: mastering a process by 1500 B.C. doesn't necessarily mean starting it in 1500 B.C. They might have begun earlier. Both concerns make us cautious about the word “first.”
What we’re looking for
For the flaw question, I'd especially look for the difference between the first known example and the first actual example. The new cup can move our earliest evidence backward without telling us where the history truly began.
Working the answers
- A
We aren't concluding that all Egyptians drank beer or that the cup represents the habits of the whole population. The issue is which society first produced an alcoholic beverage. One artifact can be relevant evidence of a society's production without being a representative sample of all its people. The problem is declaring that evidence the earliest event in history.
- B
Beer and wine are different drinks, but both are alcoholic beverages in the same ordinary sense. The argument doesn't change the meaning of that category between its evidence and conclusion. Different examples of a category don't amount to different meanings of the term.
- C
The author never says the Babylonians learned the technology from the Egyptians. Producing something earlier and teaching it to another society are different claims. The conclusion asserts that Egypt came first; it doesn't describe how Babylonian production developed.
- DCorrect
The Egyptian cup is the earliest known evidence described here. Another society could have made alcohol earlier even if no evidence of that activity has survived or been found. The argument treats the first known instance as though it must be the first instance, which is exactly the jump we questioned.
- E
Accept the stated Babylonian date. The conclusion still doesn't follow, because an earlier society's production could remain undiscovered. Asking for additional support for that background fact doesn't identify the inference error. Even perfect evidence that Babylonians made wine in 1500 B.C. wouldn't establish that Egyptians were the first people to make alcohol.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.