One of the most useful social conventions is money

I will go with answer A.

That is the only choice that provides an extra premise that is essential for the conclusion to be definitive. Moreover negating it hurts the conclusion.

The correct answer is option A.

Approach:
1. Identify the conclusion
2. Frame the falsification question (under what condition is the conclusion not true? - this will help us find those assumptions made by the author in making the claim)
3. Identify Falsification Conditions (i.e conditions under which the conclusion does not hold true/will break)
4. Framing assumptions (by negating the above conditions - identifying the conditions under which a conclusion will break helps us to identify the assumptions the author has made to ensure the conclusion does not break).

Passage Analysis
- Money is one of the most useful social conventions
- Along with Language, it is the most universal of all conventions. i.e. it is present in all societies
- Unlike language, which is rooted in an innate ability (i.e. language evolved naturally), money is an artificial invention made by human beings
- Conclusion: it seems probable that the invention of money occurred independently in more than one society

Question Stem
Find the assumption

Pre-Thinking
Conclusion: The invention of money probably occurred independently in more than one society
Falsification Question: In what scenario would the invention of money probably not have occurred independently in more than one society?
Given that:
1. Money and language are universal social conventions
2. While language is innately developed, money is a human invention
Falsification Condition: What if the societies are interconnected, so the invention of money in one society led to it being adopted in all other societies? In such a case, definitely, we cannot say that the invention of money occurred independently in more than one society. It may have occurred in one society, and the other societies adopted the invention. Hence, this condition will definitely break the conclusion
Assumption: Some (at least one) societies have been isolated (not connected) such that they cannot adopt/be influenced by conventions in other societies

Option Choice Analysis

(A) Some societies have been geographically isolated enough not to have been influenced by any other society.
Exactly what we arrived at. Correct answer. You can verify this by negating the assumption.
Negation: No society is isolated enough to not have been influenced by any other society. This means that money could have been invented in some society and be adopted by other societies. This will definitely break the conclusion that invention of money occurred independently in more than one society.
The negated assumption breaks the conclusion. Hence, it is the correct answer.

(B) Language emerged independently in different societies at different times in human history.
The conclusion is specific to whether money emerged independently. Language emerging independently or not has no impact on this conclusion.

(C) Universal features of human society that are not inventions are rooted in innate abilities.
So what? this only tells us that features that are not inventions are rooted in innate abilities (example: language). But our conclusion is about money (which is an invention - nor rooted in innate ability). This option has no actual impact on our conclusion, which is about money. Other features of society are not relevant.

(D) If money were not useful, it would not be so widespread.
This does not mean in any way that money was invented independently in more than one society. Money could have spread to all societies from one society, because its very useful, or money could have evolved independently in multiple societies, because each of these societies understood the usefulness of money and invented them independently. Both cases are possible. Hence this cannot be the correct assumption.

(E) No human society that adopted the convention of money has since abandoned it.
Irrelevant to the argument here.

Hope this helps.

EXPLANATION FROM POWER PREP

The premises state that both money and language are universal. This is the equivalent of saying that both money and language are present in every society. The argument concludes that money was probably invented independently in more than one society, because all societies use money and money is a human invention. It is important to clearly identify this conclusion, as many of the answer choices in this question justify statements other than the conclusion of the argument.

Premises: Society --> Money --> Human Invention

Conclusion: Money was probably invented independently in more than one society.

The other key to this question is to focus on the logical gap in the argument. Although money is used by all societies, that does not automatically prove it was invented independently in more than one society. It is possible that money was invented independently by just one society and then spread from that society to all other societies. In that case, money would not have been invented independently in more than one society. However, if an answer choice can somehow demonstrate that several societies were completely independent from the rest, this would prove that money was invented independently in more than one society.

Answer Choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. Note the use of the word some. If some societies were geographically isolated (i.e. independent), and all societies have money, then the geographically isolated societies must have invented money independently. This would justify the conclusion that money was probably invented independently in more than one society.

Answer Choice (B): The conclusion of this argument does not ultimately depend on any facts about language. Money and language might both be universal social conventions, but they are not necessarily identical social conventions. Even if language emerged independently in different societies, money might still have developed in only one society and then spread to all other societies.

Answer Choice (C): This is a Shell Game Answer. Since we know from the stimulus that money is not rooted in an innate ability, this answer choice would prove that money is an invention. However, this fact was already provided in the premises of the argument. The correct answer choice needs to prove that money developed independently in more than one society.

Answer Choice (D): This answer choice is also a Shell Game Answer. The utility of money has no bearing on the issue at hand. The contrapositive of this answer choice states that if money were widespread, then it would be useful. Since the premises show that money is widespread, it would logically follow that money is useful. However, the conclusion claimed that money was invented independently by more than one society, not that money is useful.

Answer Choice (E): This answer choice is yet another Shell Game Answer. If the author had concluded that money is universal, then this answer choice might be an assumption of that argument. However, the fact that money is universal was a premise of this argument, not the main conclusion. Once again, this answer choice fails to prove the actual conclusion that money developed independently in more than one society.

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.