LSAT 139 – Section 1 – Question 13

LSAT 139 - Section 1 - Question 13

June 2013

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:08

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT139 S1 Q13
+LR
Strengthen +Streng
Eliminating Options +ElimOpt
A
4%
158
B
88%
165
C
0%
149
D
4%
158
E
4%
158
131
142
153
 +Medium 142.273 +SubsectionEasier

Video of JY doing this

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

A small collection of copper-alloy kitchen implements was found in an abandoned Roman-era well. Beneath them was a cache of coins, some of which dated to 375 A.D. The implements, therefore, were dropped into the well no earlier than 375 A.D.

Summarize Argument
The author concludes that the kitchen implements were dropped into the well no earlier than 375 A.D. He supports this by saying that some of the coins found beneath the implements dated to 375 A.D.

Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that the kitchen implements were dropped into the well after the coins, simply because they were found on top of the coins. He assumes that the coins could not have fallen through the kitchen implements and that the well's contents have not been disturbed or displaced over time in a way that would make it difficult to reliably date the implements based on the coins.

A
The coins used in the Roman Empire often remained in circulation for many decades.
Irrelevant. Regardless of how long the coins were in circulation, they still dated to 375 A.D., which means that they couldn’t have been dropped into the well earlier than 375.
B
The coins were found in a dense cluster that could not have been formed by coins slipping through an accumulation of larger objects.
If the coins couldn't have fallen through the kitchen implements, it's much more likely that they were dropped into the well before the implements. If they were, the implements couldn't have been dropped in before 375 A.D.
C
The coins had far more value than the kitchen implements did.
Irrelevant. It doesn’t matter whether the coins or the implements were more valuable. The argument is only trying to determine when they were dropped into the well.
D
The items in the well were probably thrown there when people evacuated the area and would have been retrieved if the people had returned.
Irrelevant. It doesn’t matter why the items were dropped into the well; the author is only addressing when they were dropped into the well.
E
Items of jewelry found beneath the coins were probably made around 300 A.D.
Irrelevant. The fact that the jewelry was made around 300 A.D. tells us nothing about when it was dropped into the well. Even if it was dropped in then, it would just mean it was dropped before the coins, which makes sense since it's older.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 139 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Reading Comprehension

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply