Centuries ago, the Maya of Central America produced elaborate, deeply cut carvings in stone. The carvings would have required a cutting tool of hard stone or metal. Iron-ore deposits exist throughout Central America, but apparently the Maya never developed the technology to use them and the metals the Maya are known to have used, copper and gold, would not have been hard enough. Therefore, the Maya must have used stone tools to make these carvings.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
Show Hint
- In various parts of the world, civilizations that could not make iron from ore fashioned tools out of fragments of iron from meteorites.
- All the metallic Mayan artifacts that have been found by archaeologists are made of metals that are too soft for carving stone.
- The stone out of which these carvings were made is harder than the stone used by other Central American peoples.
- The technique that the Maya used to smelt gold and some other metals could not have been easily applied to the task of extracting iron from iron ore.
- Archaeologists disagree about how certain stone tools that have been found among Mayan ruins were used.
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
This question asks us to find the statement that most seriously weakens the argument presented in the passage. The argument's conclusion is that the Maya must have used stone tools for their carvings. This is a conclusion of necessity, based on eliminating other options.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
The argument is structured as follows:
Premise 1: The carvings required a hard tool (hard stone or metal).
Premise 2: The Maya could not use iron from ore.
Premise 3: The metals they did use (copper, gold) were too soft.
Conclusion: Therefore, the Maya must have used stone tools.
To weaken this conclusion, we need to find an option that introduces a viable alternative to stone tools that the argument has overlooked. The argument assumes that the only sources of metal were smelted ore, copper, and gold.
Analyzing the Options:
(A) In various parts of the world, civilizations that could not make iron from ore fashioned tools out of fragments of iron from meteorites.
This statement introduces a new possibility: the Maya could have obtained hard iron from meteorites, without needing the technology to smelt iron ore. If they had access to meteoric iron, they could have made hard metal tools. This provides a direct alternative to stone tools and challenges the certainty of the conclusion that they *must* have used stone. Therefore, this option seriously weakens the argument.
(B) All the metallic Mayan artifacts that have been found by archaeologists are made of metals that are too soft for carving stone.
This statement strengthens, rather than weakens, the argument. It confirms Premise 3, reinforcing the idea that the known Mayan metals were inadequate for the task.
(C) The stone out of which these carvings were made is harder than the stone used by other Central American peoples.
This statement is irrelevant to the type of tool used. The hardness of the carved stone makes the feat more impressive but doesn't challenge the logic about the tools available to the Maya.
(D) The technique that the Maya used to smelt gold and some other metals could not have been easily applied to the task of extracting iron from iron ore.
This statement also strengthens the argument. It reinforces Premise 2, explaining why the Maya couldn't use the available iron ore deposits.
(E) Archaeologists disagree about how certain stone tools that have been found among Mayan ruins were used.
This might slightly weaken the argument by introducing uncertainty, but it doesn't offer a strong alternative. Disagreement about the specific *use* of stone tools doesn't eliminate the possibility that they were used for carving. Option (A) provides a much more direct and powerful challenge to the conclusion by offering a plausible alternative tool material.
Step 3: Final Answer:
Option (A) is the only choice that introduces a new source of hard metal that the argument fails to consider, thereby breaking the logical chain that leads to the conclusion that stone tools were the only possibility.
Top Questions on Critical Reasoning
- A study shows that employees who work from home tend to be more productive. A company is considering allowing employees to work from home at least three days a week. Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the company's argument?
- GMAT - 2025
- Verbal Reasoning
- Critical Reasoning
- The director of a museum claims that visitors will be more likely to attend an exhibition if it is promoted through social media. Which of the following assumptions is necessary for the director's claim to be valid?
- GMAT - 2025
- Verbal Reasoning
- Critical Reasoning
- A recent study claims that reading books increases intelligence. Which of the following would most weaken the argument?
- GMAT - 2025
- Verbal Reasoning
- Critical Reasoning
- A study suggests that a new drug will help reduce symptoms of a certain illness. Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the study's conclusion?
- GMAT - 2025
- Verbal Reasoning
- Critical Reasoning
- A company claims that its employees work better when they have flexible hours. Which of the following, if true, would most reveal a flaw in the company's reasoning?
- GMAT - 2025
- Verbal Reasoning
- Critical Reasoning
Questions Asked in GRE exam
In early-twentieth-century England, it was fashionable to claim that only a completely new style of writing could address a world undergoing unprecedented transformation — just as one literary critic recently claimed that only the new ”aesthetic of exploratory excess” can address a world undergoing . . . well, you know. Yet in early-twentieth-century England, T. S. Eliot, a man fascinated by the ”presence” of the past, wrote the most innovative poetry of his time. The lesson for today’s literary community seems obvious: a reorientation toward tradition would benefit writers no less than readers. But if our writers and critics indeed respect the novel’s rich tradition (as they claim to), then why do they disdain the urge to tell an exciting story?
- GRE - 2024
- Reading Comprehension
In the 1970’s, two debates engaged many scholars of early United States history. One focused on the status of women, primarily White women. Turning on the so-called golden age the ory, which posited that during the eighteenth-century colonial era, American women enjoyed a brief period of high status relative to their English contemporaries and to nineteenth-century American women, this debate pitted scholars who believed women’s lives deteriorated after 1800 against those who thought women’s lives had been no better before 1800. At issue were the causes of women’s subordination: were these causes already in place when the English first settled North America or did they emerge with the rise of nineteenth-century industrial capital ism? The second debate, the so-called origins debate, concerned the emergence of racial slavery in the southern colonies: was slavery the inevitable result of the deep-rooted racial prejudice of early British colonists or did racial prejudice arise only after these planters instituted slave labor?
Although these debates are parallel in some respects, key differences distinguished them. Whereas the debate over women’s status revolved around implicit comparisons of colonial women to their counterparts in the antebellum period (1800-1860), thus inviting comment from scholars of both historical periods, the origins debate was primarily confined to a discussion about slavery in colonial America. Second, in contrast to the newness of the debate over women’s status and its continued currency throughout the early 1980’s, the debate over race and slavery, begun in the 1950’s, had lost some of its urgency with the publication of Morgan’s American Slavery, American Freedom (1975), widely regarded as the last word on the subject. Each debate also assumed a different relationship to the groups whose histories it concerned. In its heyday, the origins debate focused mainly on White attitudes toward Africans rather than on Africans themselves. With few exceptions, such as Wood’s Black Majority (1974) and Mullin’s Flight and Rebellion (1972), which were centrally concerned with enslaved African men, most works pertaining to the origins debate focused on the White architects, mostly male, of racial slavery. In contrast, although women’s historians were interested in the institutions and ide ologies contributing to women’s subordination, they were equally concerned with documenting women’s experiences. As in the origins debate, however, early scholarship on colonial women defined its historical constituency narrowly, women’s historians focusing mainly on affluent White women.
Over time, however, some initial differences between the approaches taken by scholars in the two fields faded. In the 1980’s, historians of race and slavery in colonial America shifted their attention to enslaved people; interest in African American culture grew, thereby bringing en slaved women more prominently into view. Historians of early American women moved in similar directions during the decade and began to consider the effect of racial difference on women’s experience.- GRE - 2024
- Reading Comprehension
The most plausible justification for higher taxes on automobile fuel is that fuel consumption harms the environment and thus adds to the costs of traffic congestion. But the fact that burning fuel creates these ”negative externalities” does not imply that no tax on fuel could ever be too high. Economics is precise about the tax that should, in principle, be levied to deal with negative externalities: the tax on a liter of fuel should be equal to the harm caused by using a liter of fuel. If the tax is more than that, its costs (including the inconvenience to those who would rather have used their cars) will exceed its benefits (including any reduction in congestion and pollution).
- GRE - 2024
- Reading Comprehension
Objectively, of course, the various ecosystems that sustain life on the planet proceed independently of human agency, just as they operated before the hectic ascendancy of Homo sapiens. But it is also true that it is difficult to think of a single such system that has not, for better or worse, been substantially modified by human culture. Nor is this simply the work of the industrial centuries. It has been happening since the days of ancient Mesopotamia. It is coeval with the origins of writing, and has occurred throughout our social existence. And it is this irreversibly modified world, from the polar caps to the equatorial forests, that is all the nature we have.
- GRE - 2024
- Reading Comprehension
Music critics have consistently defined James P. Johnson as a great early jazz pianist, originator of the 1920’s Harlem ”stride” style, and an important blues and jazz composer. In addition, however, Johnson was an innovator in classical music, composing symphonic music that incor porated American, and especially African American, traditions.
Such a blend of musical elements was not entirely new: by 1924 both Milhaud and Gershwin had composed classical works that incorporated elements of jazz. Johnson, a serious musician more experienced than most classical composers with jazz, blues, spirituals, and popular music, was particularly suited to expand Milhaud’s and Gershwin’s experiments. In 1927 he completed his first large-scale work, the blues- and jazz-inspired Yamekraw, which included borrowings from spirituals and Johnson’s own popular songs. Yamekraw, premiered successfully in Carnegie Hall, was a major achievement for Johnson, becoming his most frequently performed extended work. It demonstrated vividly the possibility of assimilating contemporary popular music into the symphonic tradition.- GRE - 2024
- Reading Comprehension