RC Question 18 Explanation
QUESTION TEXT: The passage provides the most support for…
DISCUSSION: The right answer is directly supported by the passage. The wrong answers either contradict the passage, or have zero support in the passage.
All the wrong answers use familiar terms though. They’re designed to trap you if you only have fuzzy knowledge of the passage, and can’t locate line references to disprove tempting, wrong answers. Locating references can be done pretty quickly, if you actually practice doing it.
Take a passage you’ve done before and have a friend quiz you on where to find specific facts. Time yourself and see how fast you can do it. Aim for under five seconds for any given fact in the passage.
___________
- Wampum as money was only mentioned in paragraph 1, and that paragraph never says wampum was used as money prior to European contact.
- CORRECT. Lines 37-42 say this directly. The formation of the confederacy was the “impetus” for more complex uses of wampum. Impetus means “cause of”.
- The passage simply doesn’t mention this. In writing this answer, LSAC was counting on your brain to go “Hmm, money, hmm, constitution, combine, combine, combine….ah!, maybe money changed the constitution”
In other words, this is a classic answer that randomly combines words from the passage, but utterly lacks support. - This contradicts the passage. Lines 58-60 say that wampum belts recorded and stored items of government business. That’s different from “promulgating edicts” which means communicating what the laws are.
- This simply isn’t in the passage. It has zero support. I don’t know how to “explain” how that it’s wrong, beyond that.
You distinguish between “promulgating edicts” and what is said in lines 58-60 for answer D, but those same lines say the belts served to make government business “publicly available.” Is that not communicating what the law is as well? It seems to say the same thing, so I was just wondering if there’s more elaboration there. Thanks!
I was perhaps too dismissive. But, promulgating edicts has a pretty specific meaning. An edict is not merely a law but instead a special order or proclamation from authority, usually a king. Promulgating means to make widely known, for instance having a herald in each town announce the edict repeatedly in plain language so that all shall know.
The US constitution is written down, but it is not an edict and it was not promulgated per se. It’s a pretty specific phrase.
Note: This is an old comment but I wanted to clarify the point.