82 LR One Question 22
- « 82 LR One Question 21
- 3238 of 3815
- 82 LR One Question 23 »
Comments
omg why answer choice B is wrong？
I though the reason why the author said “original” is because she based on the incomplete historical records, which she mentioned in the beginning as a premise. She conceded that the record was incomplete but she still used it...isn’t that a contradiction?
Or, is that just an inconsistentcy? Could u please tell me where is the boundary between these two?
Thank u!
1. This question is sneaky. I hate it.
2. For LSAT purposes, inconsistency is the same as contradiction. Both words describe the situation where two things cannot both exist at the same time.
3. There is no contradiction in this passage. To concede that the record is incomplete and then to use it anyway would be a form of the Absence of Evidence flaw. But it is nevertheless logically possible to say both that the record is incomplete and yet that it also provides evidence. By contrast, it would be inconsistent to contend that the record is both incomplete and also complete.
4. In this particular case, the author makes a "chicken or egg" argument; she says barter came before money because in isolated instances where money disappeared, societies went back to "the original barter system." The ORIGINAL barter system?! The argument tried to sneak it in (I hate it. See point 1 above), but there it is: This premise just assumes that barter was the original system. The conclusion of the argument is that barter is the original system. Thus, the argument 'relies on a premise that presupposes what the argument attempts to show in the conclusion." That's circular reasoning!