to the top

#17 - How the pigment known as Han purple was synthesized

Cking14
LSAT Leader
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 11:10 pm
Points: 0

Hi,

I chose answer choice (B) for this question. Can someone please explain how on earth (A) strengthens the argument? If it was discovered by accident, it made more sense to me that if the white glass was used for everyday items, then, the discovery by accident would be strengthened since it was only used for a small amount of items. This is what (B) is saying. (A) is just talking about geography. How does that help the argument?

Thanks!
Chris
Robert Carroll
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 424
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2013 7:18 am
Points: 362

Chris,

Answer choice (B) does not make it more plausible that the discovery was by accident. That each product was only used for certain items does nothing to strengthen the accidental discovery. Whatever way the process was originally discovered, those who discovered it would of course use the product in whatever way they thought best.

Answer choice (A) shows that both products were produced in a small area, thus strengthening the possibility that one was discovered during the production of another because there is less chance of independent discovery of each process separately.

Robert Carroll
mokkyukkyu
LSAT Leader
 
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2016 2:41 pm
Points: 5

Hi,
I'm not sure why D is wrong...
Or maybe this can be assumption, but not strengthener?
I thought its necessary to know the ingredients were available, otherwise the phenomenon in the question will not occur.
Why is D wrong?
Adam Tyson
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 2376
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:01 pm
Points: 2,190

Does it help us if the ingredients are easily obtainable? Nope - they could be very hard to find, and only in limited areas at great expense, and our argument would still be at least as good as if they were easily acquired. Ease is not an issue here, and in fact may weaken the argument by introducing the possibility that anyone, anywhere could have stumbled across the pigment without trying to make the glass.

There is certainly an assumption here that the ingredients were obtainable - otherwise, if they were not, then neither the glass not the pigment could ever have existed. Ease, though, has nothing to do with it. What we want is to strengthen the claim that the pigment was discovered accidentally while making the glass, and ease of obtaining the ingredients has no impact on that claim.

Answer A helps, as discussed above, by narrowing the scope of where the two things (pigment and glass) were found. If the pigment was found all over the country, but the glass was only found in one place, that would hurt, so by tying the two to each other geographically we somewhat strengthen the idea that the two at least were created in the same place. Not much of a strengthen, but better than any of the other answers, and so that's what we go with.
Adam M. Tyson
PowerScore LSAT, GRE, ACT and SAT Instructor
Follow me on Twitter at https://twitter.com/LSATadam
bli2016
LSAT Leader
 
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 7:30 pm
Points: 66

Wondering why C would be wrong? I thought this would also limit the possibilities that they were discovered separately.
Adam Tyson
PowerScore Staff
PowerScore Staff
 
Posts: 2376
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2011 5:01 pm
Points: 2,190

Tell us more about that, bli2016. Why do you think that having only a few people "in the know" strengthens the claim that the pigment was discovered by accident while making glass? What's the connection between "very few people" and "accident"?

More importantly, what makes C better than A? We are tasked with selecting the best answer, not the right answer or a good answer, so your analysis needs to take into account not only the merits of any given answer choice, but its merits relative to the other answer choices. A helps by putting the two things (pigment and glass) in the same neighborhood as each other, and while that's not hugely helpful, it does help somewhat. If you like C, then, you have to be able to explain why it is more helpful than A.

Give that some thought, and let us know what you come up with. We'll be standing by to help!
Adam M. Tyson
PowerScore LSAT, GRE, ACT and SAT Instructor
Follow me on Twitter at https://twitter.com/LSATadam
LSAT2018
LSAT Master
 
Posts: 458
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2018 1:11 am
Points: 457

Adam Tyson wrote:Does it help us if the ingredients are easily obtainable? Nope - they could be very hard to find, and only in limited areas at great expense, and our argument would still be at least as good as if they were easily acquired. Ease is not an issue here, and in fact may weaken the argument by introducing the possibility that anyone, anywhere could have stumbled across the pigment without trying to make the glass.

There is certainly an assumption here that the ingredients were obtainable - otherwise, if they were not, then neither the glass not the pigment could ever have existed. Ease, though, has nothing to do with it. What we want is to strengthen the claim that the pigment was discovered accidentally while making the glass, and ease of obtaining the ingredients has no impact on that claim.

Answer A helps, as discussed above, by narrowing the scope of where the two things (pigment and glass) were found. If the pigment was found all over the country, but the glass was only found in one place, that would hurt, so by tying the two to each other geographically we somewhat strengthen the idea that the two at least were created in the same place. Not much of a strengthen, but better than any of the other answers, and so that's what we go with.



I am still having trouble eliminating Answer (D). If it were easily obtainable, wouldn't the chances be higher?
T.B.Justin
LSAT Master
 
Posts: 107
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2018 6:57 pm
Points: 109

My pre-phrase: Something that increases the likelihood that Hans purple was synthesized on accident during the process of producing white glass (Heated up too fast or cooled too fast, or a combination).

I get to the answer choices and I am disappointed!


This is my reason for why (C) is incorrect, if anyone wants to check me, I'd appreciate it :)

If the technique (likely discovered on accident during glass production) used for producing Hans purple was known to very few (limited amount) of people during the Qin and Hans dynasties, then that doesn't have an impact on the likelihood of Hans purple being discovered on accident or not, if anything its referring to the ones that were entrusted with applying the technique for producing Hans purple.