#21 - The Iliad and the Odyssey were both attributed to

[Franny_i]

I would read that "minor" as applying to both the copying errors and the corruptions, Franny, but even if we don't, you've hit the nail on the head in that we don't know how corrupted the texts are. We do know that the tone, vocab, and details in the two works are very different, and the issues raised in answer B are not likely to be enough to account for all that much variation.

Also, would those errors, even if they were substantial, really hurt the claim that they were not both written by Homer? Wouldn't we be left wondering even more? it could cut either way - maybe the two works are even more different than we thought! If it could strengthen and could weaken, and it all depends on you choosing to interpret it one way and not another, then it's not a good choice for either question type. Don't pick an answer that needs your help!

Think of answer C as setting up an analogy. "Modern" isn't the issue - it's the comparison that matters. If we know that one author wrote two certain current works, and those two works differ substantially in the same way the Iliad and Odyssey differ, then by analogy we can say that perhaps those two ancient works were also written by one person, Homer. It doesn't prove it, but it tells us that it is possible for one writer to vary that much. That's some help.

Thank you Adam. Your explanation/analogy helped me understand the question better. I'm still not 100% certain of why B is wrong, but I definitely understand why C is more correct.

[Newagephilosopher]

I completely understand what you're saying. However, C is relevant by analogy. See my earlier response:

If the same modern writer can create two works drastically different from one another, perhaps Homer did as well, and so the Iliad and the Odyssey were the works of the same poet. You have a point, though: maybe modern writers are totally different from ancient poets. It's not a perfect analogy for sure, and it does not disprove the conclusion. It merely weakens it, which is good enough for us - no other answer choice comes even close to accomplishing this goal.

Let me know if that makes sense!

Hello Nikki (or whoever might be lurking these threads),

I chose D for this question as I thought it was better than C. 2 questions:

1) D could weaken the argument, since if we assume that if at least one of them are written by Homer, then it demonstrates that such inconsistencies within the book are typical of Homer, thus weakening his conclusion that "they are almost certainly not the work of the same poet". Likewise in C, if we assume that Homer's situation maps on to the "modern poet", then sure that would weaken the argument as well.

C and D both involve an assumption, and D actually addresses the topic at hand. So I chose D

2) If you do choose C, then Section 3 of October 2005, Question 24 would make A a correct answer, since you could relate a broad generalization to the actual situation at hand. Perhaps it is SLIGHTLY different because for this question, there was absolutely no mention at all about "economic conditions."

Thanks!

[Brook Miscoski]

Franny,

Because choice (B) is about "minor" errors, but you need to explain away "great" differences, you should eliminate (B) confidently. Everyone will gradually develop her own sense of a sweet spot for aggressiveness with the choices, and on this, you should strive to be more aggressive.

Philosopher,

Choice (D) should be immediately eliminated because you are trying to address a comparison between works, not an internal comparison within a work.

There are other problems with (D). You don't know the degree of inconsistency, so you don't know how much lifting (D) can do. You also don't know whether the internal inconsistencies mean that we have a host of poets writing each of the works!

The stimulus concludes that the two poems were written by different poets, and you need to show they were written by the same poet. Choice (D) does nothing or maybe is contrary to your goal. Choice (C), the correct response, bluntly establishes that a single writer can vary substantially between two different works.

[Brook Miscoski]

p.s.

To ask about a different question, please find that question's thread, to avoid confusing others with branching discussions.

[jwheeler]

I had the same issue with C as did many other people apparently. It's one of those questions where I feel like I've seen an analogous answer in other LR questions and it was wrong (maybe it was a "justify except" where the slightly weaken wouldn't be good enough, or maybe I'm crazy and not remembering correctly- both valid possibilities when it comes to LSAT prep I think).

Anyway, my thought with E was that the fact that many poets were involved in each would contribute to a difference in tone and vocabulary. There could've been different contributors to each of the 2 works, which would make them sound different. I thought it would still be appropriate to say that Homer wrote both of these because simply having a contributor doesn't take away from the author.

Thoughts?

[Brook Miscoski]

jwheeler,

The question stem asks us to weaken the argument. The conclusion of the argument is that the Iliad and Odyssey are almost certainly not both the work of the same poet (Homer). (E) states that both works were the result of an extended process involving many poets. Because we are trying to weaken the argument by showing that a single poet could have composed both poems, (E) does not weaken the argument. On the surface, E states that many poets were involved, which is consistent with the stimulus. It is a stretch to try to see E differently.

You are proposing that Homer could still be the "author" and the state he found the stories in could be the explanation for why the works have stylistic differences. I still think that it is very problematic to call that the "same poet," but even so, (E) doesn't eliminate the possibility that all of the same poets were involved in the oral history of each story, or explain why tone and vocabulary, which are choices of the person culminating the work, would have been pre-determined.

With respect to (C), that choice tells us it is common for two works by the same individual to have such tone and vocabulary differences. This directly attacks the argument's claim that such differences cannot occur in the same author.

I think what throws you and others off is the reference to modern authors. That reference shows that we are certain, not guessing, that the same author can make two very different works. But at the same time, LSAT testers are trying to eliminate choices for relevancy and extraneous information. Remember, this is a weaken question. New information will be brought it. Relevancy is determined by the impact of the fact or the principle. You can't necessarily eliminate a choice that mentions "modern" just because the stimulus is about something ancient.

[ck123123]

What is the problem with (B) in this question? My only thought is that it doesn't believe the "minor copying errors and other textual corruptions" could contribute to the difference in tone and vocabulary and in the certain details -- I guess because it uses the phrase "differ greatly" in those regards. But my immediate thought was that these poems were written thousands of years ago and in a whisper down the lane type of translation that accumulates over time could produce such great difference in tone, vocab, etc.. Furthermore, I was worried that (C) could be a shell game, as Homer was considered a poet and (C) refers generally to writers. I suppose writers could include poets, but that just was not my first thought. Do you have any clarify to offer on these points? Thanks!

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Hi ck,

For answer choice (B), your instincts are correct. We can't go from minor copying errors to dramatic differences in vocabulary, tone, and details of the fictional world. Those are too inconsistent. Even if there were an effect similar to that which you describe, in which minor errors add up over time to major changes, that wouldn't explain the answer choice given. The answer choice states that what we have NOW is filled with the minor errors. We need to know that there are large differences now, as we see the works, and not minor ones.

Answer choice (C) is an argument by analogy. It's ok that it talks about writers as a general category while our stimulus talks about poets as a subset of the general category of writers. We can still analogize and see that if two works written by the same writer now are able to be as different as the Iliad and the Odyssey, we weaken the author's conclusion. Answer choice (C) is a fact that doesn't destroy the argument in the stimulus, but does shed some doubt on the conclusion. That's all we need to do. Just make the conclusion less likely than it was before the answer choice.

Hope that helps!

Rachael

[ihenson]

HOW does answer A weaken the conclusion, HowardQ? So what if there are hymns that are very different from those poems? Shouldn't hymns be different, since they are different things? For that matter, how do we know that those hymns attributed to Homer are being properly attributed? The author is arguing that very problem, that we may be looking at incorrect attribution. Or perhaps they are properly attributed but the Iliad is not? Our author might respond to answer A by saying "that proves that the Iliad was not written by Homer! Thanks for the help!"

The evidence here is that two things are very different. The conclusion is that they must have different sources. To weaken that, we want to show that two very different things could nonetheless have come from the same source. It would help if those two very different things were the same kind of thing - compare poems to poems, hymns to hymns, baked goods to other baked goods, cars to other cars, etc. It wouldn't be much help to say "this pie is very different from this quilt, but my grandmother made them both," because pies and quilts are going to very different no matter who made them (one would hope). Of course, answer C isn't much help there because "works" by the same modern author could be a letter to the editor and a zombie screenplay, but at least in this answer we are comparing two things whose attribution is known - that one person definitely did both things. That helps with the claim that two things being written differently does not prove that they were written by different people.

Let us know more about how you see answer A as weakening the conclusion, if you still feel it has merit, and we'll see if we can do more to analyze that and enlighten you. Meanwhile, keep up the good work!

Hi Adam,

I was caught between A and C and ultimately chose A because, like others, of the concern that it's talking about modern authors. I understand that the word "attributed" weakens A because C states that different works were definitely by the same author, but I am having a hard time understand this piece of what you wrote and applying it to future questions:

"HOW does answer A weaken the conclusion, HowardQ? So what if there are hymns that are very different from those poems? Shouldn't hymns be different, since they are different things? For that matter, how do we know that those hymns attributed to Homer are being properly attributed? The author is arguing that very problem, that we may be looking at incorrect attribution. Or perhaps they are properly attributed but the Iliad is not? Our author might respond to answer A by saying 'that proves that the Iliad was not written by Homer! Thanks for the help!"'

Couldn't the same thing be said for choice C?

HOW does answer C weaken the conclusion? So what if there are modern artists that write different works? Shouldn't they be different, since it's a different writing style? ... Perhaps they are properly attributed but the Iliad is not? Our author might respond to answer C by saying "that proves that modern writing is different! Thanks for the help!"

I think my concern about this type of thinking is that I could theoretically have similar lines of thinking for multiple answers on many questions. I'm not sure how this would help me narrow it down?

[Adam Tyson]

I'll refer you to another of my responses in this thread, ihenson:

Think of answer C as setting up an analogy. "Modern" isn't the issue - it's the comparison that matters. If we know that one author wrote two certain current works, and those two works differ substantially in the same way the Iliad and Odyssey differ, then by analogy we can say that perhaps those two ancient works were also written by one person, Homer. It doesn't prove it, but it tells us that it is possible for one writer to vary that much. That's some help.

Arguments by analogy will always look to a different situation than the one being studied, and they rely on their being at least some relevant similarity between the things being compared. Answer C compares a situation with an ancient writer to a very similar situation with a modern one. The difference is that in the case of the modern writer, we KNOW that the same writer wrote both things, and that's why it helps. It means that at least in some cases, we know that it's possible for a single writer to write two different things that are very different in tone, vocabulary, and details. If a modern writer can do that, why should we believe Homer could not? If those differences do not by themselves indicate that different writers were responsible for the two written works, then the support for the conclusion is virtually nonexistent. We would need more information before we could be convinced of what this author wants us to believe.