Examkin

Question

Difficulty: HardWeaken

Archaeologist: Obsidian tools discovered at the inland Neolithic settlement of Karasura match the unique geochemical composition of deposits from the volcanic island of Milos, situated hundreds of kilometers away across open water. Since no watercraft from this era have been recovered in the regional archaeological record, several researchers maintain that the tools arrived via roundabout overland trading routes. However, traversing the rugged coastal mountain ranges on foot would have been vastly more perilous and resource-intensive than open-water seafaring. Therefore, the discovery of these tools at Karasura proves that the settlement's inhabitants possessed indigenous seafaring capabilities far earlier than conventional chronologies suggest.

Which of the following statements, if true, each weaken the archaeologist's argument? (Select all that apply)

  1. A
    Sediment core samples indicate that early Neolithic watercraft made of hollowed timber rapidly decompose in the acidic soil typical of the region, leaving virtually no trace in the archaeological record.
  2. Geochemical analyses of obsidian artifacts from several contemporary coastal island settlements reveal that their seafaring residents regularly acquired Milian obsidian and exchanged finished tools with mainland populations.Answer
  3. C
    Recent spectrometric testing indicates that the obsidian tools found at Karasura share chemical similarities with volcanic outcrops in the central Anatolian plateau as well as those on Milos.
  4. During the Neolithic period, an established network of regional down-the-line exchange allowed valuable raw materials to pass between adjacent neighboring communities over short distances without any single community traveling long distances or braving mountain terrain.Answer
  5. E
    Excavations at Karasura have uncovered advanced bone and flint agricultural implements whose crafting techniques were distinct from those found on Aegean islands.

Answer

The statements showing that maritime islanders traded the tools to mainland communities and that down-the-line regional exchange moved goods across short distances without long journeys each weaken the argument.
The author concludes that Karasura's inhabitants must have independently developed seafaring capabilities based solely on the presence of island obsidian and the difficulty of overland travel. The statement describing intermediary coastal islanders who acquired the obsidian and traded it with mainland groups directly provides an alternative explanation that relieves Karasura's inhabitants of the need to sail. Similarly, the statement explaining down-the-line exchange shows that goods could move incrementally across adjacent communities without requiring any single community to navigate hazardous mountains or sail open seas.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the argument's premises and main conclusion
Premises establish that Milian obsidian was found at Karasura, no regional Neolithic boats have been found, and traversing overland mountains was far harder than seafaring. Main conclusion: The discovery proves Karasura's inhabitants possessed indigenous seafaring capabilities earlier than assumed.
Deconstructing the argument isolates the author's leap from the presence of island obsidian to the claim that the settlement's own inhabitants sailed to retrieve it.
2
Expose the unstated assumptions and false dilemma
The author assumes a false dilemma: either Karasura's people endured grueling overland treks or they independently built boats and sailed. This overlooks intermediary trade networks and third-party maritime groups.
Weakening an argument on the LSAT typically involves introducing alternative explanations that break the necessary link between the evidence and the conclusion.
3
Select the statements that provide viable alternative mechanisms
The statement showing intermediary island seafarers traded finished tools and the statement showing short-distance down-the-line land trade each explain the presence of obsidian without requiring Karasura's inhabitants to have seafaring technology.
Both statements independently undermine the conclusion that Karasura developed indigenous maritime capabilities.

Key Concept

Identifying alternative explanations and exposing false dilemmas in explanatory causal arguments
Rate this question

Topics

Weaken

More questions from this topic