- Fri Oct 19, 2018 5:27 pm
#59671
Robertson, we reach the answer as follows:
Stimulus: argues that game was invented after 1000AD because of rubber use.
Reaction: makes sense if Ulama had no dead ball period.
Question Stem: ID assumption. Loosely speaking, it's an argument based on evidence, so on the first pass we look for answers that could be supportive or could defend the stimulus from attack (the supporter/defender model).
(A) We care about the first date played, not how often, so irrelevant.
(B) We don't care about other uses of rubber, so irrelevant.
(C) We care about the first date played, not popularity, so irrelevant.
(D) This is a pretty strong answer, and is at least inside the scope of the argument.
(E) It doesn't matter whether Cortez or some other person figured out when rubber began to be used, that wouldn't change the first date rubber could have been used.
(D) is thus the only answer remaining. It's directly responsive to my reaction--what if the game was not always played with a rubber ball? Additionally, it defends the argument from potentially harmful information by eliminating the possibility that the game was ever played with a non-rubber ball. So this is a Defender assumption.
