Q5

[tplan21]

So, i feel dumb asking since obviously no one has already asked and this question is old. But i dont get how the answer is (C).

What is the "particular branch of research" and how are they "coping"?


i am so horrible at being able to read a question and find where it says it the passage, because most questions dont have answers that are black and white. You have to take pieces here and there from the passage and make inferences. I cant seem to make any strides. RC used to be my best area in all standardized tests.

[timmydoeslsat]

So, i feel dumb asking since obviously no one has already asked and this question is old. But i dont get how the answer is (C).

What is the "particular branch of research" and how are they "coping"?


i am so horrible at being able to read a question and find where it says it the passage, because most questions dont have answers that are black and white. You have to take pieces here and there from the passage and make inferences. I cant seem to make any strides. RC used to be my best area in all standardized tests.

The particular branch of research is archaeology and they have been coping with several difficulties. They were faced with the fact that ancient texts revealed little about the creation of textiles. Yet, they overcame that!

These new methods overcame the problems. The new methods were advances in technology that enabled them to use materials found that would have been discarded previously and a whole new outlook on the field occurred. Even if the item found had no discernible value, they should still preserve it because future advances in the field may warrant it usable!

[tplan21]

Follow-up: im really not this dumb, promise; although i may appear like it. But how did you know from reading the passage that archaeology was a branch of research? is this outside knowledge, or was i just supposed to know?

[giladedelman]

Hey, no need to get so down on yourself! We are all free to be confused on this forum. Check some of my old posts for examples. But ditch the "d" word!

Anyway, nice explanation from Timmy above.

The LSAT probably does expect us to know that archeology is a branch of research. However, there is support for this in the passage, e.g. around line 15:

"Yet despite these obstacles, researchers have learned a great deal about ancient textiles and those who made them, and also about how to piece together a whole picture from many disparate sources of evidence."

That help?

[ahn2014]

I don't see why the answer(B) is wrong.

In line 20, the author says technological advace privides more information.
In line 45, he also says reconstructuring provides valuable way.

Aren't these recommedations to guide future activities?

[ohthatpatrick]

You could spin those two line references into being suggested courses of action for the future. But that's really adding something to the page that isn't there.

Where do you see "future" or "recommendation"?

If I say "The Lions are having a lot of success with their run-and-shoot offense", am I recommending that other teams adopt the run-and-shoot offense?

No, not necessarily. I can just be stating a fact about the Lions.

The two line references you cited tell us what archeologists are doing. The author doesn't package in any wording that turns these into recommendations. They appear in the passage merely as descriptions.

(Recommendations would normally require some wording like "should / ought / ___ would be wise to do ___ / ____ would be fruitful")

Overall, I would suggest approaching this question like you would a Main Point question: what was the author's primary goal/purpose in this passage? Where in the passage do we find the author's main point?

The main point of the passage (the Most Valuable Sentence, as I call it), is line 14-18.

Like most passages, this one begins with background info and then uses a but/yet/however/recently to pivot into the primary focus.

So lines 14-18 give us the wording for our main point (the correct answer to Q1, (B), mirrors this sentence).

(A) no one was criticizing the archeologists' "controversial" methods, so the author doesn't need to defend them.

(B) the author doesn't ever say anything normative/prescriptive. The whole passage is descriptive, just describing how researchers have made breakthroughs.

(C) "an account" = descriptive. The first paragraph explained the background of the difficulties facing archeologists looking to study textiles / women's contributions. The rest of the passage explains ways in which researchers are working around those problems.

(D) the author doesn't reject any views

(E) there aren't many (or any?) hypotheses, other than maybe the small statue one at the end.