- Thu Feb 02, 2017 12:15 pm
#32422
The correct answer is (E).
We are looking for an argument that is "analogous" with paragraph 2. If we go back to paragraph 2, the author says that the generally accepted theory is based on ethnography evidence rather than archeology. Then he says that while some ethnographic evidence supports the generally accepted theory, there is OTHER ethographic evidence that MAY suggest a different theory (the author's theory that debunks the economic theory).
So he combats the ethnographic evidence with other ethnographic evidence (but note that he seems to hold that archeological evidence as the best possible evidence, which he doesn't have either (line 20)).
(A) is wrong because it compares prosecution's circumtancial evidence and direct evidence. These are two different types of evidence.
(B) is wrong because the prosecution uses physical evidence and the defense uses the SAME physical evidence to establish two different theories. I also note that physical evidence is more analogous to archeological evidence.
(C) is wrong because the defense argues that the prosecution evidence is circumstancial and that it has no direct evidence. The defense does not offer any evidence.
(D) is wrong because its questioning the trustworthiness of prosecution's witness while offering in defense other witnesses "whose reputations are beyond reproach." This one might have been attractive, but I was able to discount it once I saw E.
(E) is correct because it says that the prosecution's case is based on on circumtancial evidence, but the defense as OTHER circumtancial evidence that suggests that the defendant is innocent.
