PrepTest 139

Incorrect. While this answer aligns with the conclusion since it discusses the "earlie[st]" the utensils could have been dropped in the well, it doesn't strengthen it. It doesn't address the order that the items were dropped in the well.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen

Stimulus Summary:
A well had some kitchen utensils sitting on top of some coins dated to 375AD. Therefore, the utensils were chucked in the well later than that date.

Answer Anticipation:
So some kitchen utensils are sitting on top of coins dated to 375AD. If they're on top of those coins, that means they were dropped in after them, right? And thus the conclusion is valid? Well, we know there's a flaw in the argument since we're being asked to strengthen it, so the answer must be that it doesn't mean that the utensils were necessarily dropped in after the coins.

How could that be the case? Well, maybe those coins were thrown in after the utensils, but something caused them to get shuffled around. Maybe the coins naturally fell between the utensils, or drawing water out of the well caused the larger objects to move to the surface and the smaller ones to get buried down. Maybe the utensils floated and the coins sank (the utensils are copper alloy, but maybe they were hollow and had a lot of air in them!). These are all possibilities that undermine the conclusion, so we should look for an answer that establishes the coins were, in fact, thrown in the well before the utensils—in other words, all of these possibilities didn't happen.

Answer Explanation:
This answer rules out one way that the order the objects (utensils, coins) were discovered in the well might not reflect when they were dropped in the well. By ruling out a possibility that undercuts the argument, this answer strengthens the conclusion. If this is true, then the coins didn't slip through the utensils and thus were likely in the well when the utensils were dropped in, justifying the conclusion.

Key Takeaway:
The more information you're "adding" to an answer to make it work, the less likely it is correct in a Strengthen question. Here, (E) required a few jumps to make it strengthen the argument—its reliance on assumptions means that it's wrong.

Incorrect. The value of the items doesn't matter—they all ended up in the well.

Incorrect. This answer doesn't establish the order that the items were chucked in the well, so it doesn't affect the argument.

Incorrect. Very tempting answer! It seems to suggest that things in the well are layered in the order that they were dropped in. However, without tying it into the utensils, this answer doesn't address the layering of the coins and utensils and thus doesn't help with the assumption. Even if older jewelry was found under the coins, the utensils still could have been there first, with the other items all slipping through the cracks between them.