#17 - Beads were used as currency for centuries. But why

[Administrator]

Please post your questions below!

[AM4747]

Hello,

For this question, I initially chose the correct answer (C), but then I changed my answer to B. I understand why B is wrong, but there is another consideration which makes C wrong as well. I will explain both below:

(B) is wrong in speaking of primary and secondary use. In other words, even if something developed out of something else, that does not mean that the thing developed is secondary. Primary and secondary can be interpreted in many ways, but in this stimulus, it seems to characterize which use is more common — and the stimulus does not provide information in this regard. Derivation does not, in other words, signify primary or secondary uses. Hence, answer choice (C) which gets straight to the idea of derivation seems to be correct.

However, my problem with answer (C) is its attribution of the "same" original use with regard to gold and silver on the one hand, and beads on the other. In the stimulus, whereas the former are referred to as "decorative objects", the latter is referred to as "objects of adornment". My reasoning was that these two are not the same, but are similar (is every decorative object really object of adornment or vice versa?). Answer choice (B) which states "similarity" (as opposed to sameness) is more correct in this respect.

Therefore, there is one aspect in each answer choice (B and C) that makes one prefer one over the other. The only other reason I can think of preferring C over B is that B makes a causal assumption, which is unwarranted, given the facts of the stimulus. Nevertheless, there are a couple of questions where the makers of the test do not make their answers as logically airtight as one would expect. I guess this is not completely unwarranted because the question states "most" justify, hence making this a classic strengthen question, allowing the correct answer choice to have a little bit of wiggle room for a flaw.

I think I provided the answer to my own question lol. But my question is more general, how do I approach these somewhat convoluted questions where there is potential for more than one correct answer?

I thank you deeply in advance,
All best

[Dave Killoran]

(B) is wrong in speaking of primary and secondary use. In other words, even if something developed out of something else, that does not mean that the thing developed is secondary. Primary and secondary can be interpreted in many ways, but in this stimulus, it seems to characterize which use is more common — and the stimulus does not provide information in this regard. Derivation does not, in other words, signify primary or secondary uses. Hence, answer choice (C) which gets straight to the idea of derivation seems to be correct.

I have a slightly different breakdown of (B), actually. To me it's not the primary and secondary that's an issue, for starters. The stimulus clearly states that "they were first used mainly, and often solely, as decorative objects," which suggests this was their primary usage. What came afterward would then be secondary. Now, let's say you looked at the situation today and said they operate in both senses, so neither is now primary or secondary; they are equal. Would that make this answer correct? No, because of the more problematic part (to me at least): the description of transferring uses is inaccurate. The answers states that the primary similarity (decorative) "can cause the secondary use of one to be transferred to the other." I don't see that as exactly what happened. It wasn't that monetary value was transferred to beads from gold, silver, etc, but that beads took on that same role as a result of the original use. That "grow into" vs "transfer to" distinction is perhaps a small one, but one that nonetheless seems important to me.

However, my problem with answer (C) is its attribution of the "same" original use with regard to gold and silver on the one hand, and beads on the other. In the stimulus, whereas the former are referred to as "decorative objects", the latter is referred to as "objects of adornment". My reasoning was that these two are not the same, but are similar (is every decorative object really object of adornment or vice versa?). Answer choice (B) which states "similarity" (as opposed to sameness) is more correct in this respect.

I never had an issue with the use of adornment, in part because the author is clearly equating beads to the other decorative objects mentioned here. The dictionary definition supports that interpretation too: "a thing that adorns or decorates; an ornament." I believe the test makers would say that even without the exact definition in hand, the nature of how the author makes the argument suggests an equation between the two, meaning (C) is the preferred answer.


There are definitely questions out there that I don't love, or feel that they could have done a better job in making the correct answer "right" or the incorrect answers more "wrong." This isn't one of the ones I'd put on the problem list though.

Thanks!

[vbkehs]

Can you please explain why C is correct in terms of being a sufficient justification for the argument? To me, the logical force doesn't seem strong enough (I chose B and I wasn't confident in it for this reason as well). Thanks in advance!

[Adam Tyson]

Answer C is NOT a sufficient justification for this argument, vbkehs, but that's putting too much pressure on that answer because this is not a Justify the Conclusion question. It's a Strengthen question, so the answer doesn't have to do that kind of heavy lifting. All it has to do is "most help", as the stem asks us, and C helps more than any other answer.

Watch for language like "helps" or "does the most" or "contributes to" in the stem - when you see those, you cannot be looking at a Justify question, because they all allow for something less than complete proof of the conclusion. Those qualifiers are a way of lessening the required impact of the answer, and there can be no lessening of the impact in a Justify scenario!

For Strengthen questions, just pick the one that helps the most, even if it only helps a little. A little help is better than none!

[Katherinthesky]

Is (E) wrong because the "in general" is unsupported - i.e., nowhere does the stimulus imply that decorative objects were used to represent value in general? In other words, objects of adornment don't necessarily mean that they represented general value?

Thank you in advance.

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Hi Katherine,

Absolutely right on. Here we know about objects that have value for particular circumstances (for adornment, for money). We don't, as far as the stimulus goes, have any examples of objects that have value in general. We are going from specific use to specific use, not from a general value to specific value.

Great work!

[April30Gang]

Hello Powerscore,

Can someone let me know about my reason for ruling out B. B says "similar" use. They uses are not similar; they were in fact the same.

C let's us know that they uses were in fact the same.

That's how I was able to rule it out.

[Adam Tyson]

Similarity isn't the problem here, April30Gang, and they could have crafted a correct answer using that concept rather than the uses being exactly the same. The real problem with answer B is what Dave described earlier in this thread, where he said:

It wasn't that monetary value was transferred to beads from gold, silver, etc, but that beads took on that same role as a result of the original use. That "grow into" vs "transfer to" distinction is perhaps a small one, but one that nonetheless seems important to me.

[lounalola]

Would it also be fair to say that B is wrong because it implies a causality that isn't in the stimulus?