Hi akansha!
This is a great question.
Let's start out by looking specifically at the passage and what it's attempting to convey. The opening paragraph discusses literary Greek culture, but by line 20, it has narrowed to a criticism of Goody's explanation of Ancient Greece's position as a "law giver." The remainder of the passage is dedicated to an explanation of how that perception "which has captured the imaginations or scholars like Goody" is in fact, not a complete explanation in order to fully understand Ancient Greece's legal system. The author then supplements his criticism of Goody's and others' views with facts and theories about why Goody's approach does not explain everything. In other words, the author does not say that we can never understand Ancient Greece's legal sysytem, only that Goody has a limited approach to the problem and fails to consider all the relevant information.
Now let's compare the wording of the two answer choices in order to better understand the dilemna, as they are both similarly phrased but turn on a very precise understanding of the language in both:
Answer (B) says: point out the weaknesses in a particular approach to understanding ancient societies
on the other hand,
Answer Option (E) states: convey the difficulty of accurately understanding attitudes in ancient societies
Here Answer (B) is the superior choice because most of the textual "real estate" after the first passage is ennumerating the flaws in Goody's approach. And so the language of (B) stating "point out weaknesses" nicely captures the passage's purpose. The author never suggests that his criticism of Goody is not a full and accurate understanding of the material or that it's impossible to articulate it. So Answer Option (E) is really overstating the purpose of the passage.
Thank you for the great question!