PrepTest 151, Section 3, Question 15
Some food historians conclude that recipes compiled by(53 more words not shown)
The argument does which one(3 more words not shown)
- AIt rejects a(18 more words not shown)
- BIt offers support(16 more words not shown)
- CIt takes issue(17 more words not shown)
- DIt uses a(16 more words not shown)
- EIt tries to(25 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Was Apicius typical, or was he experimenting?
A surviving cookbook could tell us what one compiler thought worth recording without showing how wealthy Romans usually cooked. Imagine a modern chef famous for unusual combinations: those recipes might reveal the chef's style much better than what most well-off households serve. Fame doesn't automatically make a cookbook representative.
That's the author's concern. Few other Roman recipes survive, so we have little to compare with Apicius. The modern chefs illustrate why his collection could have been unusual too. The author doesn't establish that it was unusual; the point is that the historians are moving too quickly in treating it as reliable evidence of the group's cooking.
What we’re looking for
We're asked what the argument does. I'd describe it as challenging the historians' inference through a modern comparison.
Working the answers
- A
Insufficient support is part of the author's complaint, but 'solely' leaves out the argument's specific method. The author provides the modern-chef comparison to show how a notable recipe collection could be atypical. Also, the conclusion is that the historians' inference is too hasty, not that their view has been conclusively disproved. C captures both the challenge and the analogy more accurately.
- B
The modern comparison works against the historians' inference. It makes atypical recipes a live possibility rather than supporting the claim that Apicius reliably represents wealthy Roman cooking. B sends the support in the wrong direction.
- CCorrect
The author takes issue with treating Apicius as representative, then compares him with notable modern chefs whose recipes are atypical. That modern example is meant to undercut the historians' confidence. It doesn't need to prove that ancient and modern cooking are identical; it illustrates why a prominent recipe collection might not describe common practice.
- D
The historians' conclusion is the claim being challenged, not evidence used to establish something about modern chefs. The argument uses the modern chefs as a comparison to question the ancient-cooking inference. D reverses which claim the comparison is meant to affect.
- E
The author isn't trying to prove that historical times and modern times are generally similar. The modern example serves a narrower purpose: questioning the use of one ancient collection as representative evidence. E mistakes a comparison used to challenge another claim for the conclusion the author wants to establish.
More Strategy of Argument questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strategy of Argument questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.