rakshith97 wrote:
MartyMurray wrote:
D. Some prehistoric peoples used ocher paste as an adhesive to attach small points to weaponshafts.
This choice weakens the argument by attacking a key assumption that the argument relies on.
After all, the evidence for the conclusion isn't art. The evidence is items used for making paste that could have been used for making art. So, in arriving at the conclusion, the archeologist has assumed that those items were used for making paste that was used for making art.
This choice attacks that key assumption by indicating that the items found in the cave may not have been used for making art: they could have been used to make paste for attaching points to weapons shafts.
So, by providing a clear reason to believe that the items found may not have been used to create art, this choice weakens the case for theconclusion.
Correctanswer: D
This choice weakens the argument by attacking a key assumption that the argument relies on.
After all, the evidence for the conclusion isn't art. The evidence is items used for making paste that could have been used for making art. So, in arriving at the conclusion, the archeologist has assumed that those items were used for making paste that was used for making art.
This choice attacks that key assumption by indicating that the items found in the cave may not have been used for making art: they could have been used to make paste for attaching points to weapons shafts.
So, by providing a clear reason to believe that the items found may not have been used to create art, this choice weakens the case for theconclusion.
Correctanswer: D
itsays Some prehistoric peoples used ocher paste as an adhesive to attach small points to weaponshafts.
so there were still
...
Statistics : Posted by MartyMurray • on 09 Mar 2024, 02:25 • Replies 3 • Views 304
.jpg)
