#8 - A history book written hundreds of years ago contains

[Pragmatism]

I see why answer choice C is correct. However, I chose answer choice A for the following reason:

Premise: "The book contains inconsistencies."

Conclusion: "Author must have been getting information from more than one source."

The justification you gave for "A" was

Answer choice (A): This choice does not clearly address the issue except to make it harder to understand why the inconsistencies exist. If you read into this choice (you should not), you can argue that it makes it likely that if discrepancies make their way through to the final product, it is because the author was overwhelmed, and on that basis you can argue that this choice supports the idea of multiple sources. That argument has limited value. Furthermore, the book could utilize multiple sources even if the author was unaware of the possible discrepancies, so this incorrect choice is unnecessary.

I tried to justify in a different manner. My reasoning was "if the author generally try to reconcile discrepancies between sources," it is most likely because the author knows his or her limitations on resources. Thus, if an event is to be documented, then that event cannot be taken at face value of off one anecdotal evidence (source). Thus, leading the author to actually seek additional sources just to corroborate the initial theme of the event being documented. Now, if in the interim each anecdotal event presents the bigger picture in a clearer manner at the expense of "author must have been getting information from more than one source," then to the extent the event was documented, the author on those basis alone could have foregone the inconsistency.

[Pragmatism]

I got it! What answer choice C does is provide an alternative to the fact that there were multiple inconsistencies. If it were not through multiple sources, then______? It was through a source that itself had multiple inconsistencies. Correct?

[James Finch]

Hi Pragmatism,

Essentially, yes--answer choice (C) eliminates another possible cause of inconsistencies, that the author of the history book was simply repeating inconsistencies passed down from a single source. This is a common answer in causal reasoning questions, either identifying or eliminating alternate causes for the effect given in the stimulus.

Try and identify the type of reasoning present in the stimulus as you read through Logical Reasoning question, as this will help you identify potential weaknesses in the argument that must be bolstered or proven by an answer choice. When dealing with causal reasoning that seems to work (when cause, then effect; when no cause, no effect, etc.), keep on the lookout for alternate causes in the answer choices.

Hope this helps!