Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Nov 1811:00 AM PST
-12:00 PM PST
Join us in a live GMAT practice session and solve 30 challenging GMAT questions with other test takers in timed conditions, covering GMAT Quant, Data Sufficiency, Data Insights, Reading Comprehension, and Critical Reasoning questions.
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
17 Jul 2024, 18:11
Kudos
Bookmarks
This is a critical reasoning question.
The theory is that the building is the temple of God Luga, and the evidence is that it was located in the "low town" and there were remainings of burnt fish which was used as offering.
A --> irrelevant
B --> weaken, because it proves that a building in the "low town" could not be a temple, so the theory is invalid
C --> irrelevant
D --> irrelevant
E --> strengthen, because it shows that the fish was for Luga, so the temples is of God Luga
Answer is E and B
The theory is that the building is the temple of God Luga, and the evidence is that it was located in the "low town" and there were remainings of burnt fish which was used as offering.
A --> irrelevant
B --> weaken, because it proves that a building in the "low town" could not be a temple, so the theory is invalid
C --> irrelevant
D --> irrelevant
E --> strengthen, because it shows that the fish was for Luga, so the temples is of God Luga
Answer is E and B
17 Jul 2024, 18:51
Kudos
Bookmarks
Key Evidence:
Buildings were rarely constructed with mud bricks in ancient Mesopotamia. - Not relevant to support or go against the finding that the building was a temple or not.
Ancient Mesopotamian temples built in cities were almost always built in the “citadel”. - This if true, raises doubts that whether the discovered structure was even a temple or not.
Some Mesopotamian buildings outside the “citadel” were also heavily fortified. - Not relevant to support or go against the finding that the building was a temple or not.
The altar was made of stone not commonly found in the region. - Not relevant to support or go against the finding that the building was a temple or not.
Fish were given as offerings almost exclusively to the God Luga. - This if true, supports the claims of the structure being a temple of God Luga.
For: Fish were given as offerings almost exclusively to the God Luga.
Against: Ancient Mesopotamian temples built in cities were almost always built in the “citadel”.
- Mesopotamian city found a temple structure theorized to have been a temple to the God Luga
- The structure was located outside the “citadel” area
- Burnt remains of fish, most likely offerings to the concerned deity
Buildings were rarely constructed with mud bricks in ancient Mesopotamia. - Not relevant to support or go against the finding that the building was a temple or not.
Ancient Mesopotamian temples built in cities were almost always built in the “citadel”. - This if true, raises doubts that whether the discovered structure was even a temple or not.
Some Mesopotamian buildings outside the “citadel” were also heavily fortified. - Not relevant to support or go against the finding that the building was a temple or not.
The altar was made of stone not commonly found in the region. - Not relevant to support or go against the finding that the building was a temple or not.
Fish were given as offerings almost exclusively to the God Luga. - This if true, supports the claims of the structure being a temple of God Luga.
For: Fish were given as offerings almost exclusively to the God Luga.
Against: Ancient Mesopotamian temples built in cities were almost always built in the “citadel”.
17 Jul 2024, 19:14
Kudos
Bookmarks
Bunuel
We need to Strengthen and Weaken tthis argument separately.
Strengthen :
Theory that the building was a temple to the God Luga::Buildings were rarely constructed with mud bricks in ancient Mesopotamia.Ancient Mesopotamian temples built in cities were almost always built in the “citadel”.Some Mesopotamian buildings outside the “citadel” were also heavily fortified.The altar was made of stone not commonly found in the region.Fish were given as offerings almost exclusively to the God Luga. This strengthens our argument that this temple belongs to Luga.
Weaken :
Theory that the building was a temple to the God Luga::Buildings were rarely constructed with mud bricks in ancient Mesopotamia. Irrelevant. Ancient Mesopotamian temples built in cities were almost always built in the “citadel”.Hmm, If this is true then this might not be a temple at all. HoldSome Mesopotamian buildings outside the “citadel” were also heavily fortified. So what?? Irrelevant. The altar was made of stone not commonly found in the region. So what?? Irrelevant. Fish were given as offerings almost exclusively to the God Luga. Opposses.Hence highlighted are the best choices.
