PT24.S3.Q09 - the play mankind must have been written

tanes256tanes256 Alum Member
edited December 2016 in Logical Reasoning 2573 karma
Hey, guys! I'm just drilling a few weaken questions on my lunch break and I have a question about AC C. I eliminated it but I haven't found my reasoning in the forums that matched mine, so I want to make sure I eliminated it for the right reasons. The AC only states that the coin was neither minted nor circulated after 1468. I eliminated it because the coin could've been minted or circulated prior to 1431. It also didn't see how it weakened any support between the premise and conclusion. Am I wrong here? There were other explanations that just seemed unnecessary to me. Thoughts?
https://7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-24-section-3-question-09/

Comments

  • Not Ralph NaderNot Ralph Nader Alum Member Inactive Sage Inactive ⭐
    2098 karma
    @tanes256 you are not wrong, answer choice C does nothing to the support structure of the stimulus. But be careful, we take premises in the stimulus as true and almost always a weakening answer choice does not attack the truth of a premise and as it is mentioned in the stimulus 1431 is the first year that rose noble is circulated so we take that as truth.

    Answer choice C is wrong because it does not attack the assumption made by the author that the coin rose noble could have been mentioned in the play even though it was not in the circulation. Answer choice E brings out that assumption by showing it was possible back then to know about the coin even before its circulation.

    Whenever an answer choice gives me a hard time I try to fix it. In this case answer choice C corrected form would be "rose noble was minted and its existence was known to the public prior to 1431."
  • tanes256tanes256 Alum Member
    2573 karma
    @"Not Ralph Nader" gotcha, thx!
  • tanes256tanes256 Alum Member
    2573 karma
    Hey @"Not Ralph Nader" I flubbed on my initial post. I meant to say couldn't the coin have been minted or circulated prior to 1468, NOT, 1431. I understand that we have to take the premises as true. So other than C not having any support could my other reason to eliminate be valid? Nobody mentioned this in any of the forums.
  • Not Ralph NaderNot Ralph Nader Alum Member Inactive Sage Inactive ⭐
    2098 karma
    @tanes256 correct me if I am wrong, your other reasoning for eliminating C was "the coin could've been minted or circulated prior to 1431". My understanding is answer choice C is wrong because "the coin could've been minted or circulated prior to 1431" or it could as well have been minted and circulated on or after 1431, so these possibilities does not tell us anything new about the situation therefore Answer choice C does nothing to the argument which makes it wrong.

    If you had my understanding or similar reasoning in addition to what you wrote then I think you were right. Let me know whether or not I answered your question.
  • tanes256tanes256 Alum Member
    2573 karma
    Thx @"Not Ralph Nader" that answered my question! AC C actually says 1468 and not 1431 so I wanted to make sure that my other reasoning was correct, not just that it didn't affect the argument. You mentioned being cautious of taking the premises to be true so if that was my strategy I could've gotten the wrong answer on another question. 1468 would still be taking the premises as true so that's why I just wanted to double check that my reasoning that the coin could've been minted or circulated prior to 1468 was a valid reason as well to eliminate the AC. Sorry about that!
Sign In or Register to comment.