#9 - Robin: Archaeologists can study the artifacts left by

[Luke Haqq]

Hi mkarimi73!

For the word "illicit" in this context, I would think of its meaning in terms of "not warranted" or "not permissible" (this seems a bit more general, or perhaps is encompassed in the "forbidden by custom" aspect of the definition you provide). Answer choice (A) states, "the distinction that Robin makes between two kinds of cultures is illicit." In other words, this is saying that distinction that Robin makes--between nomadic and sedentary--is not a warranted distinction to make. This isn't a point at issue between them, so (A) can be eliminated given the question stem.

To confirm that answer choice (B) is correct, we can start by denoting the two possible views:

Robin:
Kendall:

It's helpful to do this to confirm answer choices, or choose between contenders, because often one won't know one or the other's views, in which case one can't know if they disagree (to your question on answer choice (E), not knowing their views is why that choice can be eliminated). Here, answer choice (B) states, "it is reasonable to assume that a culture whose artifacts were not durable was nomadic." We can ask whether both people would agree or disagree with this statement:

Robin: Yes
Kendall: No

Robin thinks that durable artifacts imply a sedentary culture. In addition, cause and effect underlies this view. The lifestyle/culture (nomadic or sedentary) is taken to be the cause, and the effect is the durableness of the artifacts left behind by those cultures.

Kendall takes issue with this cause and effect relationship assumed by Robin. Instead, Kendall suggests an alternative cause--the cause might be the availability of materials, which leaves effects on artifacts that these cultures leave behind.

[darrengao]

How can I tell that B is not a mistaken reversal? The stimulus says if durable then sedentary. So if nomadic (non-sedentary) then non-durable. But B says if non-durable then nomadic.

Does "archeologists can study artifacts left by ancient culture to determine whether they were sedentary or nomadic" implies archeologists are able to make positive confirmations of culture types all the time (subject to some error)? Instead of, for example, archeologists' knowledge is limited to "nomadic culture doesn't produce durable artifacts". Which would satisfy the stimulus but reject B.

[Hanin Abu Amara]

Hi!

So mistaken reversal is only applicable in conditional questions. This stimulus doesn't have any language that indicates that conditional reasoning is being used.

B is the correct answer because Robin would agree that cultures with nondurable artifacts are nomadic and Kendall would disagree because the availability of materials is a factor.

You only look for mistaken reversal in conditional questions so make sure you aren't looking for it in the wrong places!

Hope that helps

Hanin

[TootyFrooty]

May I know why E is wrong? I chose E because I thought that's what they both were disagreeing on..

[Robert Carroll]

TootyFrooty,

Answer choice (E) is too broad. Kendall does not think that studying a culture's artifacts can't reveal a great deal about the culture. Kendall thinks instead that such study will not necessarily reveal whether a culture is nomadic or sedentary. What about other inferences artifacts allow you to make? Kendall makes no claims about that, implicit or explicit, so answer choice (E) is wrong by being too broad.

Robert Carroll

[kristinajohnson@berkeley.edu]

Robin: Archaeologists can study the artifacts left by ancient cultures to determine whether they were nomadic or sedentary. If the artifacts were made to last rather than to be quickly discarded, the culture was likely sedentary.
Kendall: But what artifacts a people make is determined largely by the materials available to them.

Their statements commit Robin and Kendall to disagreeing over whether

Analysis
Robin: the cause is likely sedentary the effect is artifacts made to last
AND the cause is likely nomadic the effect is artifacts quickly discarded
Kendall: the cause is mostly materials available and the effect is artifacts a people make
They disagree over the cause being likely sedentary/nomadic and mostly materials available

A. the distinction that Robin makes between two kinds of cultures is illicit

A looks correct because Kendall’s response, “what artifacts a people make is determined largely by the materials available to them,” is saying the cause is mostly materials available. Is it wrong to assume Kendall is saying the cause is not sedentary or nomadic cultures? Probably, yes, because Kendall only says “what artifacts a people make is determined largely by the materials available to them.” The word “largely” is really important. Kendall thinks materials available are mostly responsible for artifacts. We don't know if Kendall agrees or disagrees with a cause also being nomadic or sedentary cultures. Also, Kendall doesn't say anything about materials lasting or not.

Since Kendall says the cause is mostly materials available could it be right that Kendall thinks Robin is wrong about the cause being likely sedentary or nomadic cultures? Yes, but we don’t know, that would be an assumption. We only know that Kendall thinks the cause is mostly materials available so disagrees that it is likely sedentary or nomadic cultures. Kendall thinks Robin is wrong about the cause being likely sedentary or nomadic cultures so wouldn't “the distinction that Robin makes between two kinds of cultures” sedentary and artifacts made to last and nomadic and artifacts quickly discarded also be wrong or “illicit?” No, because Kendall only disagrees with the degree not necessarily with the distinction.

Robin: Disagree
Kendall: Don’t know

B. it is reasonable to assume that a culture whose artifacts were not durable was nomadic

This is tricky because this isn’t explicit in Robin’s statement and because of the conditional language in the stimulus.

There is conditional reasoning in the second sentence of Robin’s statement: “If the artifacts were made to last rather than to be quickly discarded, the culture was likely sedentary.” This means IF artifacts were made to last THEN sedentary. So, If NOT sedentary (nomadic) then artifacts were NOT made to last (artifacts quickly discarded) or IF nomadic THEN artifacts quickly discarded. This looks like a mistaken reversal to me. If B was conditional would it would look like IF artifacts not durable (quickly discarded) THEN nomadic.

The conditional language prevented me from recognizing the cause and effect language for both speakers and made understanding the cause and effect language in Robin’s statement more difficult to understand because the conditional statement is the mistaken reversal, so to speak, of the cause and effect statement so I was second guessing if I was understanding the cause and effect relationship correctly. Any advice? How could I have avoided conditional language in the stimulus and answer choice that didn't matter here?

Robin: Agree
Kendall: Disagree

C. any evidence other than the intended durability of a culture's artifacts can establish conclusively which of the two kinds of cultures a particular culture was

This answer is exaggerated.

Robin: Disagree
Kendall: Disagree

D. the distinction that Robin makes between the different kinds of cultures is as important as many archaeologists have thought

This answer is out of scope. We don’t know what “archaeologists have thought.”

Robin: Don’t know
Kendall: Don’t know

E. studying a culture's artifacts can reveal a great deal about the culture

This answer is out of scope.

Robin: Don’t know
Kendall: Don’t know

[kristinajohnson@berkeley.edu]

If B was conditional wouldn't it look like IF artifacts not durable (quickly discarded) THEN nomadic?*

Thank you very much!

[Jeff Wren]

Hi kristina,

For Answer A, the distinction that Robin makes between cultures refer to whether there were sedentary cultures and nomadic cultures and whether those two types of cultures are in fact different. Kendall never disagrees with the idea that there were sedentary cultures and nomadic cultures and that these cultures were different. What Kendall disagrees with is whether these two different types of cultures caused the different types of artifacts, not whether there were two different types of cultures.

If you haven't already done so, I'd recommend reading Robert's (Post #9) and Luke's (Post #11) earlier posts regarding Answer A.

For Answer B, if it were conditional, then your diagram looks good.

What makes this question tricky is that the stimulus involves causal reasoning, even though Robin's second sentence does contain conditional wording. Conditional and causal reasoning can overlap, but here it is much more helpful to focus on the causal reasoning. It's also important to note that in Robin's argument, there are two types of cultures (sedentary and nomadic) and two types of artifacts (durable and non-durable) and each of these pairs are essentially opposites. Robin explicitly states that durable artifacts indicate sedentary cultures, and the implicit/unstated assumption is that non-durable artifacts indicate nomadic cultures, which is what Answer B states. If non-durable artifacts did not indicate nomadic cultures, then Robin's conclusion would not make any sense.