PrepTest 139, Section 1, Question 13
A small collection of copper-alloy kitchen implements was(33 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(6 more words not shown)
- AThe coins used(11 more words not shown)
- BThe coins were(20 more words not shown)
- CThe coins had(8 more words not shown)
- DThe items in(21 more words not shown)
- EItems of jewelry(10 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Could the coins have slipped through the pots and pans?
The coins are beneath the kitchen implements, so the author assumes they entered the well first. If coins dating to 375 A.D. were already there before the implements arrived, the implements couldn't have been dropped in before 375.
But small coins might work their way through gaps between larger objects. Imagine the kitchen items being dropped in first and the coins being added later. The coins could sink below the implements, leaving the same arrangement we now observe. Being lower wouldn't establish being earlier.
What we’re looking for
To strengthen the argument, I'd want to rule out that route. Give us a reason the coins couldn't have filtered down through the implements. Then their position underneath becomes better evidence that they were already there when the kitchen items were added.
Working the answers
- A
A coin made in 375 might still be circulating in 415. That's compatible with the implements being dropped in no earlier than 375; it doesn't run against the conclusion. But it doesn't resolve our problem. Whether dropped in soon after manufacture or decades later, the coins might still have slipped beneath implements that were already in the well.
- BCorrect
The coins' tight clustering couldn't have resulted from slipping through larger objects. That blocks the alternative arrangement we imagined and strengthens the inference that the coins were deposited before the implements above them. Since some coins date to 375, that gives better support for placing the implements' arrival no earlier than 375.
- C
I don't need to know which objects were worth more. I need to know when they entered the well and whether their current positions preserve that order. Greater value doesn't answer either question.
- D
This proposes a reason people put their possessions in the well and explains why the items might have stayed there. It doesn't date the evacuation or settle whether the coins arrived before the implements. A possible motive for hiding objects isn't enough to establish their chronology.
- E
Older jewelry beneath the coins adds another layer to the picture, but it doesn't rule out the coins having slipped past the kitchen implements. And when jewelry was made isn't automatically when it entered the well. We still need the connection between the implements' position and the time they were dropped in.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.