Please explain ur answers

My answer would be C. This is because if books, post printing press, were bought (in larger quantities) by the same people who bought them earlier as well, then the number of people who learned to read not have increased. C states this. I am particularly interested to know the source. Look at option E - It states a conjecture and asks us to assume it to be a fact. Not a good choice at all.

my pick C what if it was not the number of people who learned to read that increased but the people who earlier bought expensive manuscripts....now bought more number of books because the costs fell thus increasing the total numbers of books sold......this takes the wind out of the argument.

IMO C. Increase in literacy is attributed to printing of books. option C weakens the argument by saying that large proportion of the books were bought mainly by people who bought the books earlier. This means that the number of people did not increase much. Hence we are not sure of the literacy rate.

selango wrote: Please explain ur answers my answer is also C

Do you have any more LSAT questions in this format?

IMO C . D is second contendor , but will not work because it expects more assumptions than C that is friends etc started buying copies as well instead of reading from their friends.

GMATMadeEasy wrote:IMO C . D is second contendor , but will not work because it expects more assumptions than C that is friends etc started buying copies as well instead of reading from their friends. C - Correct, since the author argues that the number of readers jumped because the number of books sold were also jumped. But this statement weakens the authors conclusion by saying that the number of books sold increased because the readers who earlier purchased the manuscript could now afford many printed books instead of one manuscript copy. Thus, this option states that though the number of copies sold increased, the number of readers remained same. Hope it helps!