PrepTest 136, Section 2, Question 2
Museum curator: Our ancient Egyptian collection includes an(69 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(8 more words not shown)
- AThe tomb in(12 more words not shown)
- BEarthenware figures were(8 more words not shown)
- CThe tomb in(17 more words not shown)
- DThe hippopotamus' legs(14 more words not shown)
- EThe hippopotamus was(7 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
A broken hippo could have religious meaning. It could also just be a broken hippo.
The curator has a plausible story: the dead supposedly had to fight beasts, and breaking an animal figure's legs was thought to help them. Finding a hippo with broken legs in a tomb fits that practice. But did someone actually break these legs for that purpose?
Imagine a child dropping a toy hippo in the tomb. Or imagine the figure breaking long after the burial. Either possibility could leave archaeologists with a damaged object even though the damage wasn't part of a ritual. We shouldn't treat the meaning of deliberate leg-breaking as proof that this particular damage was deliberate.
What we’re looking for
The question asks for an assumption the argument needs. I'd look for something protecting the connection between the damaged legs and the religious explanation. We don't have to prove that assumption from the evidence. We're identifying something the curator is relying on to make the inference.
Working the answers
- A
A child's tomb could contain a religious object. The belief concerns the dead, not just dead adults. If a child was also thought to face beasts in the afterlife, a damaged animal figure could have the same religious purpose. The curator doesn't need to rule out a child's burial.
- B
We only need to understand this hippo. Other earthenware figures could have been toys while this particular figure served a religious purpose. Ruling out every earthenware toy in ancient Egypt would go much further than the argument requires.
- C
Someone could have entered the tomb and left the hippo untouched. Entry alone doesn't destroy the connection between the broken legs and the burial ritual. Certain things a visitor might have done could matter, but the curator doesn't need the stronger claim that nobody ever entered.
- DCorrect
If the legs broke through a natural occurrence after the hippo was placed in the tomb, their condition would no longer support the story about deliberately disabling an animal for the deceased. The curator relies on excluding that explanation for the damage. This assumption supports the reasoning; it doesn't by itself prove the hippo's full history or establish that it was never used as a toy.
- E
The upside-down position might initially look significant, but the stated religious practice concerns breaking legs. We aren't told that turning a figure upside down has any religious meaning. The hippo could have shifted after burial while its deliberately broken legs still supplied the curator's evidence. Its original orientation isn't required.
More Necessary Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Necessary Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.