PrepTest 148

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument/Facts

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed/N/A

Question Type:
Methods of Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
P: The earliest evidence of music is from the Upper Paleolithic, so that's when music must have developed.

G: But the evidence was made of bone, which survives better than most materials used for instruments.

Answer Anticipation:
When the second speaker in a two-speaker stimulus starts with a, "But . . . ," it's important to see what they're pivoting from. Here, Garza starts talking about bone—the material that was discussed in Patterson's premise. Therefore, Garza is in some way attacking Patterson's premise.

Digging in deeper, Patterson uses a bone flute as the sole evidence supporting her conclusion. Garza brings up that bone is more durable than other materials used for instruments. This doesn't mean that Patterson is wrong in her conclusion—just that the evidence she cites is weaker than she might like.

So Garza brings up an additional premise to call into question how strongly Patterson's evidence supports her conclusion.

Answer Explanation:
This answer highlights that there's a consideration Patterson didn't consider that means her evidence is, at best, weak support for her conclusion. To rephrase this answer, it states that Garza points out that Patterson's conclusion requires stronger evidence, which is what his response does.

Key Takeaway:
In a two-speaker stimulus, when the second speaker starts with a pivot, you should start by figuring out what that speaker is pivoting away from.

Incorrect. Garza doesn't question whether the premise—that these bone flutes are the earliest evidence for music—is true. Rather, he states that there not being earlier evidence doesn't mean music didn't exist earlier, given that instruments are generally made from material that degrades faster than bone.

Incorrect. First, we wouldn't really characterize Patterson's conclusion as general. Second, Garza's response doesn't include a specific example/counterexample.

Incorrect. This reductio ad absurdum answer doesn't highlight Garza's response—he doesn't use Patterson's logic against her, or draw an analogy.

Incorrect. Garza doesn't draw a particular conclusion, and he certainly doesn't state that music developed earlier or later than the Upper Paleolithic.