LSAT 69, Logical Reasoning I, Q13

QUESTION TEXT: A small collection of copper-alloy kitchen implements …

QUESTION TYPE: Strengthen

CONCLUSION: The implements went into the well during 375 A.D. at the earliest.

REASONING: There were coins beneath the implements. Some of the coins were from 375 A.D.

ANALYSIS: This sounds like a good argument. You have to use your real world knowledge of coins to see the flaw.

Coins are tiny. They fall all kinds of places. Maybe the implements were there in 200 A.D. and the more recent coins fell past them.

Attack these arguments as if they’re obviously wrong. Try to find any hole. Real world knowledge is a great way to get ideas (but only ideas) for why an argument might be flawed.

___________

1. It doesn’t matter how long a coin remained in use after it was made. The date a coin was created is mentioned because it indicates the earliest date the coin could have been in the well.
2. CORRECT. This shows that the coins did not get below the implements by falling through accidentally. It sounds like the coins were there first.
3. Who cares what the coins were worth? We’re trying to figure out when they were placed in the well, not what we could sell them for.
4. We already knew someone put the implements in the well. Knowing the circumstances doesn’t change anything.
5. If the jewelry was above the implements, this information would weaken the argument.As it is, the jewelry’s age doesn’t change anything. Maybe someone put the jewels (family heirlooms) in at the same time as the coins. The jewels are at the bottom of the pile so it makes sense that they are older.

LawHub Order

LawHub Order

---