#2 - The solidity of bridge piers built on pilings depends

[Shedrickc]

I think this problem is a lot easier if it didn't lack what appears to be proper antecedent basis. On the one hand we're instructed to read carefully and in the case of MBT do not bring in outside information. Answer E) states "The Standard of refusal" and the stimulus states "The CONTEMPORARY standard of refusal. The answer explained in the PS book clearly point out the very distinction of 2 two definitions of refusal. So why in answer choice E) would one leave out the important term "contemporary" .
I was down to answer choices B) and E) my initial thought was that we know nothing g about "other bridge builders" but we know that the bridges( which were built by bridge builders( e.g., robot or alien ) prior to 1700 adhered to a "refusal" standard that was more strict than " the contemporary standard". I would've picked E) easily had the answer choice included the proper antecedent basis. I can totally see the test makers arguing the "contemporary " aspect. Is there a sure fire way to get this question? I feel like it would have been a really good most strongly supported question Instead

[Jeremy Press]

Hi Shedrickc,

This is a very good question. While it's true there is a definition of refusal in the second sentence of the stimulus, there is only one stimulus reference to a "standard" of refusal (the contemporary one that Da Ponte used, referred to in the last sentence of the stimulus). Note in this respect that definitions and standards are not necessarily the same thing conceptually. When answer choice E refers to "the" standard, it means to refer to one particular standard. Since we have only one such standard discussed in the stimulus (the contemporary one), it's safe to assume that answer choice E means to refer to that standard. It's even safer still to make that assumption, since there is a time anchor in answer choice E, the reference to the Rialto Bridge, that puts us in the same time as the contemporary standard referenced in the stimulus.

Regarding answer choice B, the stimulus contains no reference to "safety," thus we cannot prove anything definitive about safety. And, as you note in regard to answer choice C, there is no discussion of "other bridge builders," so we cannot prove anything definitive about them either.

I hope this helps!

Jeremy

[sicm91]

Hey! I see why E is correct, but isn't C saying the same thing? That is, since 1588 falls into the pre-1700 standard for refusal, then Da Ponte is not as strict as other bridges of his day because he could have gone deeper, which I understand is what E is saying.

[KelseyWoods]

Hi sicm91!

The stimulus tells us that Da Ponte met the contemporary standard for "refusal." So even though the pilings of the Rialto Bridge could possibly have been driven deeper, he met the same refusal standard that other bridge builders at the time were using.

Basically, the second sentence gives us a general definition of "refusal" but it doesn't give us the practical definition of "refusal." "Refusal" is "the point at which [the pilings] refused to go any deeper." But how exactly do you determine when they refuse to go deeper? How much force are you exerting on them? How do we measure whether they're going any deeper? The last sentence gives us the contemporary "standard" of refusal which gives us the practical definition of refusal that bridge builders used. They defined the point at which the pilings refused to go any deeper as the point at which twenty-four hammer blows would not drive the piling any deeper than two inches. If that's the "contemporary" standard of refusal, then as far as we know that's the standard that other bridge builders followed as well. The stimulus doesn't give us any information to prove that other bridge builders used a stricter standard of "refusal" than the one Da Ponte used.

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey

[sunshine123]

First off, very illuminating discussion, thank you all. However, ya'll are yet to touch on my mistake. I incorrectly assumed that the "contemporary standard" referenced in the stimulus referred to TODAY'S contemporary standard. Now, seeing that the second sentence mentioned a definition of times past that Da Ponte did not adhere to, I then assumed the contemporary standard referred to was of times present. As I see it, that reading is consistent with the words meaning. On what grounds, then , should I have recognized that the contemporary standard in question was one of another time? What about the wording?! Thanks in advance.

[Dave Killoran]

Hi sunshine,

It's because of the way that sentence starts, where they tell you the time frame is 1588, then follow up by using past tense to suggest a determination had been made about Da Ponte meeting the contemporary standard: "In a 1588 inquiry into the solidity of piers for Venice’s Rialto Bridge, it was determined that the bridge’s builder, Antonio Da Ponte, had met the contemporary standard for refusal: ..."

In 1588, there's no way they could make a determination about today's standards, so they have to be referring to 1588, and the language around the claim makes that clear.

Thanks!

[sunshine123]

Ahhhhhhhhh it was an inquiry in the 1500's.. totally missed that, thank you!!!!