#19 - A carved flint object depicting a stylized human head

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Weaken. The correct answer choice is (B)

In this stimulus, the author discusses the original purpose of an object found in a Stone Age tomb in Ireland. The object is made of carved flint, and depicts “a stylized human head with an open mouth.” Based on the size of the object, which is too small to be a weapon, and the object’s depiction of an open mouth—symbolizing speaking—the author concludes that the object was most likely the head of a speaking staff, which was “a communal object passed around a small assembly to indicate who has the right to speak.”

We know from the question stem that this is a Weaken question. Our job is to find an answer choice that raises at least some doubt that the object was the head of a speaking staff. To develop a prephrase, we need to review the evidence. The author thinks the object was the head of a speaking staff because of its size and its depiction of an open mouth. There is no obvious gap in the use of that evidence to support the conclusion. The only other information we know about the object is that it was found in a Stone Age tomb in Ireland.

This is a difficult question, because we do not have a strong prephrase. Rather than try to creatively construct factual scenarios that could attack the conclusion, we should move on to the answer choices, being on the lookout for information that tells us why the evidence given by the author does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that the object was the head of a speaking staff.

Answer choice (A): This answer choice is incorrect because we have no reason to think that the tomb should have included weapons if the object were the head of a speaking staff.

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice because it tells us that a communal object, such as a speaking staff, would not normally be buried in a tomb, as this object was. Rather, it more typically would have been passed from one generation to the next. The discovery of the object in a tomb casts doubt on the conclusion that it was probably the head of a speaking staff.


Answer choice (C): Here, the answer choice attacks the origin of the object, not its original use. This answer choice is irrelevant to the conclusion, which did not address whether or not the object was carved in Stone Age Ireland, but rather what the object’s original purpose was.

Answer choice (D): As with answer choice (A), we have no reason to think that this information would have any impact on the conclusion. Nothing in the stimulus told us that political prominence —or lack thereof—has any relation to the identification of the object as the head of a speaking staff.

Answer choice (E): This answer choice is intended to confuse you by referring back to the belief of some archaeologists that the object was a weapon. This answer choice has no impact on the determination of whether the object was the head of a speaking staff, although, if it is such a head, this information would tell us that the speaking staff is thought to symbolize a warrior’s mace.

[torymuth]

Hello:

I am very confused as to why the correct answer is letter B as opposed to E. I can't seem to figure out how B weakens the argument.
Thank you in advance for the help!!

[Nikki Siclunov]

Hi torymuth,

Thanks for your question. Yeah, this was a tricky one and it took me a minute to figure it out myself The key here is close reading: notice that they found this weird object in a tomb. Some archeologists believe it's a weapon, but the author thinks it's a communal object. Well, if communal objects were normally passed from one generation to the next (B), we wouldn't expect to find such an object in a tomb, right? So, answer choice (B) weakens the hypothesis that it's a communal object, thereby weakening the author's argument.

Answer choice (E) is irrelevant. Even if a speaking staff with a stone head symbolizes a warrior's mace, that doesn't mean that the object is itself a weapon. So, answer choice (E) doesn't weaken or strengthen either hypothesis.

Does that make sense? Let me know.

Thanks!

[Cking14]

Hi,

I chose answer choice (A) for this question and the correct answer is (B). I thought that (A) weakened the argument because, if it were true that there were no other objects that were weapons in the cave, then that means that there is a higher probability that the object they found was, in fact, a weapon. (B) has nothing to do with weapons, and it was immediately crossed off my list. How does a communal object being passed down weaken the argument that the author is trying to make when he refers to the fact that the item the archaeologists found was not a weapon?

I'm so confused!!!
Chris

[David Boyle]

Hi,

I chose answer choice (A) for this question and the correct answer is (B). I thought that (A) weakened the argument because, if it were true that there were no other objects that were weapons in the cave, then that means that there is a higher probability that the object they found was, in fact, a weapon. (B) has nothing to do with weapons, and it was immediately crossed off my list. How does a communal object being passed down weaken the argument that the author is trying to make when he refers to the fact that the item the archaeologists found was not a weapon?

I'm so confused!!!
Chris

Hello,

I'm not sure answer A makes it more likely that the remaining object would be a weapon. You could almost argue the opposite, that if there were no other weapons, it's unlikely there would be a single weapon by itself.
Answer B is somewhat confusing, but is still the best answer. It seems answer B is trying to say that the only way that communal objects were passed, as a rule, was to the next generation, not from one speaker to another. True, you could have both happen (passed among speakers, and also handed down to the next generation), but you don't know that. So answer B isn't that great, but is still the least bad of all the answers, therefore correct.

David

[pavalos5777]

Hello,

I found answer choice B appealing but ultimately rejected it and went with E because B assumes that an object that is passed down from generation to generation would not be found in a tomb. I did not think that a weakener would require such an assumption.

Whereas assuming the truth of E would weaken the author's designation of the object as a speaking staff.

Can you please provide further clarification?

Much appreciated,
Pierre

[AthenaDalton]

Hi Pierre,

Thanks for your question!

The crux of the argument here is that the flint object was not a warrior's mace, but was instead a type of communal object, such a speaking staff. Answer choice (E) says that the staff with a stone head was meant to symbolize a warrior's mace. This stops short of saying that the staff actually was, in fact, a warrior's mace. (E) indicates that the staff was still some kind of ceremonial object, and not actually a mace used in battle.

Answer choice (B) is a better choice because it indicates that the staff was not actually a communal object. If communal objects were passed down from generation to generation during the Stone Age, we wouldn't expect to find one in a tomb during that time period. It would be incongruous for the locals to "retire" an object that had traditionally been passed down as an heirloom if it were in fact a communal object. The fact that the staff was found in a tomb indicates that it probably wasn't a communal object after all.

I hope that helps clarify things for you. Good luck studying!

Athena Dalton

[akanshalsat]

For this question, we have to weaken the CONCLUSION (since that it what we are thought)

Is the conclusion not "...but it is too small for that purpose [mace]"? Because in most method questions the conclusion is usually the sentence that uses the word BUT and then says something definitive.

WHy is the conclusion the fact that they say its probably a speaking staff? and if thats NOT the conclusion and its the premise, then B attacks it and attacking the premise is not what we're supposed to do?

[Adam Tyson]

The conclusion here is definitely "the object was probably the head of a speaking staff." and the claim that it is too small to be a warrior's mace is evidence that is intended to support that conclusion. "It cannot be that thing, so it is probably this other thing" is the structure here.

What would it matter if a speaking staff is supposed to symbolize a warrior's mace? A symbolic representation of a thing is not the same as the thing itself, and could be much smaller (like my Statue of Liberty souvenir statue on my bookcase). A staff symbolizing a mace does nothing to attack the claim that the thing cannot itself be a mace, nor does it have any bearing on whether the thing is or is not a speaking staff. Answer E is just completely irrelevant here!

Make sure that the claim you identify as the main conclusion doesn't support any other claim in the argument. Main conclusions are selfish - they support nothing! If it is used as support for another claim, then it is either just a premise or else it is an intermediate conclusion, getting some support and giving some support.

[ArizonaRobin]

I think that answer E actually strengthens the argument and is, therefore, an opposite answer. If a speaking staff with a stone head symbolizes a warrior's mace, it makes sense of the fact that the object in the tomb looks like a warrior's mace, but is too small. If it was only meant to symbolize it, then it resolves the tension between the look of the object and the size of the object and supports the author's conclusion.