PT7.S4.Q21 - Historian: There is no direct evidence

wkim2015wkim2015 Member
edited April 2018 in Logical Reasoning 86 karma

I truly don't understand how the answer for this question is (a) and not (c). I literally spent an hour trying to come up with reasons as to why that could be but still can't seem to find an answer. Can someone please help? How is there an analogy being made here?

Admin note: edited title for formatting

Comments

  • NotMyNameNotMyName Alum Member Sage ⭐
    5320 karma

    Why do you think C is correct?

    The analogy is between the existence of a tariff during the third dynasty and the current existence of antiquated laws. By comparing the two, the critic shows that the existence of a law at any given time, doesn't necessarily imply that it is still relevant and, therefore, doesn't "suggest that timber was traded during the third dynasty".

Sign In or Register to comment.