I'm assuming you are referring to PT26, S2, Q9, about early pencil leads.
First, this is a most strongly supported question. This does not mean that the correct answer must be true or can be 100% validly inferred, rather the question is simply asking for the choice that has the most support, which is a big difference. Knowing this, let's dive in.
The stimulus is not an argument, but a set of facts. So, the correct answer will most likely be produced by stringing some of these facts together. What do we know? Early lead was made from solid graphite from Britain. The French had no access to this graphite during the war, so the government funded research into making lead from powdered graphite. It's not clear exactly what form the right answer will take here, so let's move onto the answers.
A: there is no support for the claim that the only source of graphite is in Britain. In fact, the stimulus contradicts this claim because the French manufactured pencils with graphite during the war without access to the British graphite.
B: This seems likely. If the French knew of a source of solid graphite that was both accessible and appropriate for their pencil needs, then why would they waste money during a war into researching powdered graphite?
C: The stimulus doesn't mention anything about the causes of war. Eliminate.
This is enticing, but it misses the mark. We do not know that government sponsored research "frequently" gives rise to inventions that are a great benefit to society... we only know of one such instance, so inferring frequently would be an over-generalization. What's more, we don't know that the French research produced an invention of "great" value to society. This is also an unwarranted assumption to make, so it is clear that this choice is not strongly supported.
E: All pencils contain lead from Cumberland? Nope, no support for this. Also, this is may even be contradicted by the fact that modern methods use powdered graphite, and Cumberland is a source of solid graphite.
Comments
First, this is a most strongly supported question. This does not mean that the correct answer must be true or can be 100% validly inferred, rather the question is simply asking for the choice that has the most support, which is a big difference. Knowing this, let's dive in.
The stimulus is not an argument, but a set of facts. So, the correct answer will most likely be produced by stringing some of these facts together. What do we know? Early lead was made from solid graphite from Britain. The French had no access to this graphite during the war, so the government funded research into making lead from powdered graphite. It's not clear exactly what form the right answer will take here, so let's move onto the answers.
A: there is no support for the claim that the only source of graphite is in Britain. In fact, the stimulus contradicts this claim because the French manufactured pencils with graphite during the war without access to the British graphite.
B: This seems likely. If the French knew of a source of solid graphite that was both accessible and appropriate for their pencil needs, then why would they waste money during a war into researching powdered graphite?
C: The stimulus doesn't mention anything about the causes of war. Eliminate.
This is enticing, but it misses the mark. We do not know that government sponsored research "frequently" gives rise to inventions that are a great benefit to society... we only know of one such instance, so inferring frequently would be an over-generalization. What's more, we don't know that the French research produced an invention of "great" value to society. This is also an unwarranted assumption to make, so it is clear that this choice is not strongly supported.
E: All pencils contain lead from Cumberland? Nope, no support for this. Also, this is may even be contradicted by the fact that modern methods use powdered graphite, and Cumberland is a source of solid graphite.
Thus by POE and affirmation, B is correct.