Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 24 May 2017, 22:12

### 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

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Historian: There is no direct evidence that timber was

Author Message
CEO
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Posts: 3454
Followers: 67

Kudos [?]: 874 [0], given: 781

Historian: There is no direct evidence that timber was [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Sep 2003, 11:13
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

50% (02:21) correct 50% (00:00) wrong based on 7 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Historian: There is no direct evidence that timber was traded between the ancient nations of Poran and Nayal, but the fact that a law setting tariffs on timber imports from Poran was enacted during the third Nayalese dynasty does suggest that during that period a timber trade was co9nducted.

Critic: Your reasoning is flawed. During its third dynasty, Nayal may well have imported timber from Poran, but certainly on today's statute books there remain many laws regulating activities that were once common but in which people no longer engage.

21. The critic's response to the historian's reasoning does which one of the following?

(A) It implies an analogy between the present and the past.

(B) It identifies a general principle that the historian's reasoning violates.

(C) It distinguishes between what has been established as a certainty and what has been established as a possibility.

(D) It establishes explicit criteria that must be used in evaluating indirect evidence.

(E) It points out the dissimilar roles that law plays in societies that are distinct from one another.

22. The criticтАЩs response to the historian is flawed because it

(A) produces evidence that is consistent with there not having been any timber trade between Poran and Nayal during the third Nayalese dynasty

(B) cites current laws without indicating whether the laws cited are relevant to the timber trade

(C) fails to recognize that the historian's conclusion was based on indirect evidence rather than direct evidence

(D) takes no account of the difference between a law's enactment at a particular time and a law's existence as part of a legal code at a particular time

(E) accepts without question that assumption about the purpose of laws that underlies the historian's argument
Manager
Joined: 08 Jan 2003
Posts: 128
Location: Ukraine
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

28 Sep 2003, 03:32
Q 21: I am between choices A) and D)
Q 22: I'd choose D)
CEO
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Posts: 3454
Followers: 67

Kudos [?]: 874 [0], given: 781

### Show Tags

28 Sep 2003, 11:31
Quote:
Q 21: I am between choices A and D

Quote:
Q 22: I'd choose D

Manager
Joined: 08 Jan 2003
Posts: 128
Location: Ukraine
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

28 Sep 2003, 11:56
In 21 the answer easily narrows down to A and D. Analogy proves to be a safer deduction from the given info.
22: In his argument Historian refers to enactment, but Critic refers to existing laws. Here comes the inconcistency in his argument.
CEO
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Posts: 3454
Followers: 67

Kudos [?]: 874 [0], given: 781

### Show Tags

29 Sep 2003, 12:37
vaka wrote:
In 21 the answer easily narrows down to A and D. Analogy proves to be a safer deduction from the given info.
22: In his argument Historian refers to enactment, but Critic refers to existing laws. Here comes the inconcistency in his argument.

for 21 ,could you please elaborate. Also whats the problem with C.

for 22 ,again for this, i am trying to find out why is C not correct.

thanks
Praetorian
Manager
Joined: 08 Jan 2003
Posts: 128
Location: Ukraine
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2003, 01:01
Hey, Praetorian,
I don't see any ground for C to be correct. If I follow the pattern, suggested in C and assume that certainty is a Law established, but a possibility is trade activity, which may be already dead, than I must be given a reason why that possibility may occur. The reference on similar case which may have taken place in past or which may be observed in present might be a proof. That is the case in our situtaion. Then you have nothing to do but conclude that this is analogy that does this job.
23: imo C could be correct. But look. The premises contain both notions <law enactment> and <existing laws>. Critic uses 2 different Subjects in his reasoning, which is incorrect. Law enactment refers to Poran and Nayal, whereas Critic in his reasoning refers to existing laws. Obviously enactmant implies existence of trade activity. Existing laws may allow both cases: trade activity still exists and trade activity has been waning or just stopped. This gap between two opposite references is a flaw.

Does that make sense to you?
Intern
Joined: 21 Mar 2011
Posts: 22
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 13

Re: Historian: There is no direct evidence that timber was [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Dec 2011, 19:35
Historian: There is no direct evidence that timber was traded between the ancient nations of Poran and Nayal, but the fact that a law setting tariffs on timber imports from Poran was enacted during the third Nayalese dynasty does suggest that during that period a timber trade was co9nducted.

Critic: Your reasoning is flawed. During its third dynasty, Nayal may well have imported timber from Poran, but certainly on today's statute books there remain many laws regulating activities that were once common but in which people no longer engage.

21. The critic's response to the historian's reasoning does which one of the following?

(A) It implies an analogy between the present and the past.

(B) It identifies a general principle that the historian's reasoning violates.

(C) It distinguishes between what has been established as a certainty and what has been established as a possibility.

(D) It establishes explicit criteria that must be used in evaluating indirect evidence.

(E) It points out the dissimilar roles that law plays in societies that are distinct from one another.

The historian statement means that the existence of a law implies that there must have been a trade activity that used to happen between Poran and Nayal. But the critic contradicts the historian by stating that existence of laws regulating activities, doesn't mean that people are actually engaged in them.
Re: Historian: There is no direct evidence that timber was   [#permalink] 28 Dec 2011, 19:35
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
There is evidence to suggest that our cave-dwelling 6 14 Mar 2011, 17:20
2 Historian: Newton developed mathematical concepts and 6 25 Sep 2008, 21:34
Historian: Newton developed mathematical concepts and 1 04 Aug 2008, 14:39
Historian: Newton developed mathematical concepts and 12 15 May 2008, 11:01
Physiological research has uncovered disturbing evidence 9 23 Jul 2011, 01:38
Display posts from previous: Sort by