Self-study
Beads were used as currency for centuries. ███ ███ ██████ ███ ████████ ████ █████ ████ ███████ ████ ████ ████ ████ ██ ████████████████ ███████ ███ █████████ ██ ████ █ ████████ ████ ████ ████ █████ ████ ███████ ███ █████ ███████ ██ ██████████ ████████ █████ ██ ██ ███████ ████ ██████ █████ ████ █████████ ██████ ██ ███████ ██ ██████████ ████ ████ ██ ██ ████ ██ █████████
Summary
The author concludes that it’s natural that beads eventually came to be used as currency.
Why?
Many objects that have been used as currency started off mainly or solely as decorative objects. Beads also started off mainly as decorative objects.
Notable Assumptions
What makes it natural or expected for beads to be used as currency? Because of what happened with other items that were initially used for decoration. We want a principle that connects the fact that other items used for decoration came to be used as currency to an expectation that beads would also be used as currency.
17.
Which one of the following ███████████ ██ ██████ █████ ████ ████ ██ ███████ ███ ████████ ██████
a
The similarity between ███ █████████ ████ ██ ███ █████████ ███████ ███ █████ ███ ███████ ███ ██ ███ ██ ██ ███████████ ██ ███ ██████
The argument isn’t trying to prove that the primary use of one object “transfers” to another. That refers to the idea that gold/silver/feathers’ use as decoration can then cause beads to be used as decoration.
b
The similarity between ███ ███████ ████ ██ ███ █████████ ███████ ███ █████ ███ █████████ ███ ██ ███ ██ ██ ███████████ ██ ███ ██████
The argument doesn’t assume that uses “transferred” from gold/silver/feathers to beads. There’s no indication that people who used gold/silver/feathers for currency then started to use beads as currency or replaced their use of gold/silver/feathers as currency for beads. The argument is simply based on the historical pattern observed in items initially used for decoration. The author thinks it’s expected that beads would follow that pattern; this doesn’t involve a use transferring from gold/silver/feathers to beads.
c
An object having █ ███████ ████████ ███ ██ ██████ ██ ████ ███ ████ ██████████ ███ ██ ██ █████ ███████ ██████ ████ ████████ ████
An object (beads) having a certain original use (decoration) is likely to have the same derivative use (currency) as do other objects (gold/silver/feathers) having that original use (decoration). (C) strengthens the argument by making explicit the assumption that because other items used for decoration came to be used for currency, we can expect the same thing would happen to beads.
d
An object cannot ████ ██ █ ██████████ ███ ██████ ██ ██████ ██ ████ ███ ████████ ████
(D) allows us to prove that an object can’t take on a derivative use if it doesn’t stop having its original use. But we’re trying to prove that we can expect an object to have a derivative use. We’re not trying to prove that an object can’t take on a derivative use.
e
The more an ██████ ██ ████ ██ █████████ █████ ██ ████████ ███ ████ ██████ ██ ██ ██ ██ ██████ ███ ██████████ █████
(E) connects the idea of representing value “in general” to being valued to particular uses. But the argument isn’t moving from an object representing value in general to some particular valuable use. The argument is going from one set of objects being used as currency to another object being used as currency.