Critical Reasoning

Codex Berinensis, a Florentine copy of an ancient roman medical treatise , is undated but contains clues to when it was produced. Its first eighty pages are by a single copyist, but the remaining twenty pages are by three different copyists, which indicates some significant disruption. Since a letter in handwriting identified as that of the fourth copyist mentions a plague that killed many people in florence in 1148, Codex Berinensis was probably produced in that year.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the hypothesis that Codex Berinensis was produced in 1148?

a) Other than Codex Berinensis, there are no known samples of the handwriting of the first three copyists
b) According to the account by the fourth copyist, the plague went on for ten months.
c) A scribe would be able to copy a page of text the size and style of Codex Berinensis in a day.
d) there was only on outbreak of plague in florence in the 1100s
e) The number of pages of Codex Berinensis produced by a single scribe becomes smaller with each successive change of copyist

OA : D

I could narrow down to B and D. But after that i am unable to conclude which should be the correct answer. The explanation in OG doesnt help much. Can some experts help me with this?

The length of the plague is irrelevant. What matters is that the original copyist and the two successive ones did not complete the work. The hypothesis is that they died and that the plague of 1148 was responsible. The fact that three copyists died lends credence to the idea that something widespread such as plague caused their deaths. D tells us that there was only one plague in the period. If there had been plagues in several other years, we would not know which one of them killed our three earlier copyists.

Is it superfluous to presume that though there was only one plague in 1148,the 4th copyist could have mentioned it in his copy,while writing it in the later years ( 1149, 1150). Is it out of scope to think in these lines?

He could certainly have mentioned it later. It is quite possible that the copying stopped for several years while the city recovered. Our correct answer simply rules out that the first three copyists didn't die in a plague in 1120 or 1180, for example.

1. The Manhattan guide lists it among the 'Strengthen the argument' type of CR questions. However to me, and many others, it looks like an Assumption question. Which type is months it and why? Is it really worthwhile to check and classify a CR question into various types before we start solving them. I score nearly 700 in mock GMATs. The only CR questions I am 'improvably' weak at are the Assumption types - I doubt if identifying them will make any difference. Classifyimg CR questions might actually harm me if I waste too much time classifying them into types. Then classifying them also makes me think too much. . However, if you advise, I will try to assume the 'classify and solve' approach once again.

2.Why is option B. Wrong. The option that says that the plague lasted only 10 would account for many things. Negating it would certainly weaken the argument. While solving the question I was able to narrow the answer down to between B,C and D and eventually picked B, which was wrong. A period of 10 months would really localise the period in which the plague occured. The fact the there was only one outbreak of plague in the 1100s doesn't really localise the time when it occured.

Received a PM on this one.

Chesswriter,this is certainly a strengthen question. I would really trust Manhattan on this - I doubt that they would get something like that wrong!
You can readily identify assumption questions on the GMAT. They say "assumption" or "assumes" or perhaps "presupposition." This question says "most strongly supports" so there is no possibility that this could be an assumption question.

You mention negating answer choice B. I generally do not advise this on regular strengthen questions. But even if this were an assumption question B would not be a good answer. One thing you do not want from an assumption answer is to be too specific. If you did negate B, if this were an assumption question, you would say that "the plague did NOT go on for 10 months." This means it could have lasted for 9 months, or 10.5 months or 12 months or anything but 10. So negating this would not impact the conclusion as far as I can see since it would still leave so many options both longer and shorter than 10 months.

Adding choice B (which we will do since it is a strengthen) does not help much either. Just knowing that the plague was 10 months does not help to establish 1148 as the year. You say that 10 months would help localize the year. Yet what if there were 10 plagues that century? Now we have no idea if it is 1148 or 1100 or 1183.

As to why D is correct, I will just quote Tani with her explanation above.

Tani Wolff - Kaplan wrote:The length of the plague is irrelevant. What matters is that the original copyist and the two successive ones did not complete the work. The hypothesis is that they died and that the plague of 1148 was responsible. The fact that three copyists died lends credence to the idea that something widespread such as plague caused their deaths. D tells us that there was only one plague in the period. If there had been plagues in several other years, we would not know which one of them killed our three earlier copyists.

Chesswriter -

As to your first point, do you need to classify even if you do better otherwise?

The answer is you will be taking the test (and presumably with no assistance!) So you need to do what works for you. If it works for you to do questions intuitively then do them intuitively.

You can also do a bit of hybrid. That is what most good test-takers do. They listen to the experts and they take some but not everything and they integrate that into their method.

You can just be on the lookout for those assumption questions (as I said above they basically always say "assume" or "assumption" on the GMAT). You can pay particular attention to these and find a technique that works and do the rest of the questions in your intuitive manner.

make the test your own, in every section, always.

Thank you David,
I hadn't expected you to reply so quickly. Thanks for the thoughtfulness with which you answered my doubts.

After reading all the explanations I'm still confused.

"...Since a letter in handwriting identified as that of the fourth copyist mentions a plague that killed many people in florence in 1148...".

My understanding is that the author mention exactly the plague of 1148 and not another one. So to be sure that the CB was produced in that year we must know that the plague did not last m ore than a year. If the plague lasted 24 months than the CB could have been produced in 1149.

Thanks in advance for helping.

The questions asks for the response that "most strongly supports", not the one the "proves" the codex was written in 1148.

What is the sense of the word "produced" as used in the stimulus?

Codex Berinensis, a Florentine copy of an ancient roman medical treatise , is undated but contains clues to when it was produced. Its first eighty pages are by a single copyist, but the remaining twenty pages are by three different copyists, which indicates some significant disruption. Since a letter in handwriting identified as that of the fourth copyist mentions a plague that killed many people in florence in 1148, Codex Berinensis was probably produced in that year.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the hypothesis that Codex Berinensis was produced in 1148?

Acoording to the dictionary, it could mean either
4 : to make available for public exhibition or dissemination (which could mean that the production of the codex took place at a point in time or at least within a narrow time frame)
or, 6 : to compose, create, or bring out by intellectual or physical effort (which would mean that the production could have taken place over several years)

Could someone please clarify?

Tani wrote:The length of the plague is irrelevant. What matters is that the original copyist and the two successive ones did not complete the work. The hypothesis is that they died and that the plague of 1148 was responsible. The fact that three copyists died lends credence to the idea that something widespread such as plague caused their deaths. D tells us that there was only one plague in the period. If there had been plagues in several other years, we would not know which one of them killed our three earlier copyists.

Hi,
You have written that The hypothesis is that they died and that the plague of 1148 was responsible.
However, the question states that hypothesis is that the book was produced in 1148.
Are we really concerned to know the cause of death of the copyists ? IMO, we are concerned about how to strengthen the hypothesis that the book was produced in 1148.

Let me assume that there were multiple plagues in Florence in the 1100s, first copyist died in 1st, second copyist died in the second one. I can say that the 4th copyist survived the 1148's plague - that's how he is writing about it. But how does all this lend strength to the hypotheses that book was produced in 1148 ?

eajamat wrote:

Tani wrote:The length of the plague is irrelevant. What matters is that the original copyist and the two successive ones did not complete the work. The hypothesis is that they died and that the plague of 1148 was responsible. The fact that three copyists died lends credence to the idea that something widespread such as plague caused their deaths. D tells us that there was only one plague in the period. If there had been plagues in several other years, we would not know which one of them killed our three earlier copyists.

Hi,
You have written that The hypothesis is that they died and that the plague of 1148 was responsible.
However, the question states that hypothesis is that the book was produced in 1148.
Are we really concerned to know the cause of death of the copyists ? IMO, we are concerned about how to strengthen the hypothesis that the book was produced in 1148.

Let me assume that there were multiple plagues in Florence in the 1100s, first copyist died in 1st, second copyist died in the second one. I can say that the 4th copyist survived the 1148's plague - that's how he is writing about it. But how does all this lend strength to the hypotheses that book was produced in 1148 ?

Well, remember that the correct answer has only one plague happening in Florence in the 1100's.

Imagine the scenario with some concrete details.

Say you find a book written by some friends. The first 80 pages are written by Tim. Then the next 8 pages are written by Amy. Then the next 4 pages are written by Lauren. Then the next 3 pages written by Mike, etc. The first thing you'd ask yourself is, "why didn't Tim finish the book himself?" And then you'd likely wonder. "What on earth happened that caused Amy to write just 8 pages and then stop? And why was Lauren also stopping so quickly?" So while it doesn't have to be the case, it's perfectly logical to deduce that some significant event prevented Tim, then Amy, then Lauren, etc. from finishing the book. If there'd been 3 or 4 separate events, then it would be hard to know when the book was written. But if there'd only been one, it would be reasonable to conclude that the book was written while this event was happening. This is why the argument links the date of the plague to the publication of the document.