- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8948
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Thu Jan 12, 2017 2:31 pm
#32054
Complete Question Explanation
Method of Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (A)
On this problem, you can use an approach akin to that you might use on a Point-at-Issue question. Specifically, you might begin by identifying the disagreement between Patterson and Garza. Patterson claims that the Upper Paleolithic was the period during which music likely first arose based on the bone flutes discovered that date to this period, the earliest extant evidence of music. Garza disagrees that Patterson has provided sufficient evidence to make this claim. In other words, Garza suggests that Patterson does not have a strong basis to conclude that the Upper Paleolithic was in fact the period during which music originated. To back up his contention, Garza introduces evidence that (1) the Upper Paleolithic is characterized by extensive use of bone and (2) bone survives better than other materials commonly used for musical instruments.
Once you have determined the structure of this stimulus and its salient features, a good prephrase for a Method of Reasoning problem will include an abstract description of the means by which Garza responds to Patterson. You might predict that "Garza disagrees with Patterson by providing evidence that shows that Patterson lacks sufficient reason to reach her conclusion." If in doubt or between two answer choices on a Method of Reasoning question, match the parts of your contender answers to the corresponding information in the stimulus to verify which choice provides the most accurate and complete description.
Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. This choice is a good match for our prephrase and describes accurately the manner in which Garza contends that Patterson has failed to establish conclusively that the discovery of bone instruments implies a concurrent origin of music.
Answer choice (B): This choice is erroneously suggests that Garza disputes the veracity of Patterson's premise. Garza does not take exception to Patterson's contention that bone flutes from the Upper Paleolithic are the oldest extant evidence of music. Instead, Garza disputes whether this evidence is sufficient to reach Patterson's conclusion.
Answer choice (C): This choice is based on a misunderstanding of the function of Garza's premise about wood instruments. The deterioration of wood is not a counterexample to Patterson's conclusion. Instead it is an example of evidence that may suggest that Patterson lacks sufficient evidence to make her claim. In fact, Patterson may be correct! The wood example only shows that she has not provided enough facts to reach her conclusion.
Answer choice (D): This choice simply describes something that is not there. Garza does not make any argument analogous to that of Patterson, whether fallacious or not. Garza responds to Patterson's argument directly. The only comparison present (not an analogy) is that between other materials used to make instruments and bone.
Answer choice (E): While this choice is correct that Garza reaches a conclusion inconsistent with that of Patterson, it is inconsistent insofar as Garza questions the strength of Patterson's argument, not that Garza reaches some separate, conflicting conclusion. Further, Garza does not base this claim on Patterson's evidence. Instead, Garza introduces a new consideration that Patterson has evidently failed to consider.
Method of Reasoning. The correct answer choice is (A)
On this problem, you can use an approach akin to that you might use on a Point-at-Issue question. Specifically, you might begin by identifying the disagreement between Patterson and Garza. Patterson claims that the Upper Paleolithic was the period during which music likely first arose based on the bone flutes discovered that date to this period, the earliest extant evidence of music. Garza disagrees that Patterson has provided sufficient evidence to make this claim. In other words, Garza suggests that Patterson does not have a strong basis to conclude that the Upper Paleolithic was in fact the period during which music originated. To back up his contention, Garza introduces evidence that (1) the Upper Paleolithic is characterized by extensive use of bone and (2) bone survives better than other materials commonly used for musical instruments.
Once you have determined the structure of this stimulus and its salient features, a good prephrase for a Method of Reasoning problem will include an abstract description of the means by which Garza responds to Patterson. You might predict that "Garza disagrees with Patterson by providing evidence that shows that Patterson lacks sufficient reason to reach her conclusion." If in doubt or between two answer choices on a Method of Reasoning question, match the parts of your contender answers to the corresponding information in the stimulus to verify which choice provides the most accurate and complete description.
Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. This choice is a good match for our prephrase and describes accurately the manner in which Garza contends that Patterson has failed to establish conclusively that the discovery of bone instruments implies a concurrent origin of music.
Answer choice (B): This choice is erroneously suggests that Garza disputes the veracity of Patterson's premise. Garza does not take exception to Patterson's contention that bone flutes from the Upper Paleolithic are the oldest extant evidence of music. Instead, Garza disputes whether this evidence is sufficient to reach Patterson's conclusion.
Answer choice (C): This choice is based on a misunderstanding of the function of Garza's premise about wood instruments. The deterioration of wood is not a counterexample to Patterson's conclusion. Instead it is an example of evidence that may suggest that Patterson lacks sufficient evidence to make her claim. In fact, Patterson may be correct! The wood example only shows that she has not provided enough facts to reach her conclusion.
Answer choice (D): This choice simply describes something that is not there. Garza does not make any argument analogous to that of Patterson, whether fallacious or not. Garza responds to Patterson's argument directly. The only comparison present (not an analogy) is that between other materials used to make instruments and bone.
Answer choice (E): While this choice is correct that Garza reaches a conclusion inconsistent with that of Patterson, it is inconsistent insofar as Garza questions the strength of Patterson's argument, not that Garza reaches some separate, conflicting conclusion. Further, Garza does not base this claim on Patterson's evidence. Instead, Garza introduces a new consideration that Patterson has evidently failed to consider.
