Kaplan verbal - Weaken

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 152
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 12:56 pm
Location: New york
Thanked: 9 times

Kaplan verbal - Weaken

by agarwalva » Mon May 07, 2012 7:08 pm
Archaeologists have discovered various paintings on the walls and ceiling of a Chinese
cave whose entrance was blocked by a volcanic eruption in the 25th century B.C. and only
recently cleared by an earthquake. Since the paintings depict warriors using Type C bronze
weapons, these archaeologists have concluded that Type C bronze weapons were already widely
used in this area by 2500 B.C., far earlier than was previously believed.
Which of the following pieces of additional evidence would most seriously weaken the
archaeologists' conclusion?

(A) Another entrance to the cave remained clear until a second volcanic eruption
1,000 years after the first.

(B) Archaeologists have evidence that Type C bronze weapons were in wide use in areas
of present-day India as early as 2500 B.C.

(C) Alternative methods of dating place the time of the volcanic eruption somewhat
earlier, at around 3000 B.C.

(D) Most experts believe that Type C bronze weapons were not in use anywhere in
present-day China until 2000 B.C.

(E) The paintings were very faded when the archaeologists found them, making
identification of the depicted weapons difficult.

I marked e
OA1

Is it worth contemplating over this I dont know..

but if the paintings in itself are not clear we cannot reach any conclusion....

Please explain
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1248
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 2:57 pm
Location: Everywhere
Thanked: 503 times
Followed by:192 members
GMAT Score:780

by Bill@VeritasPrep » Mon May 07, 2012 7:52 pm
The stimulus draws the conclusion that Type C bronze weapons were in the area before 2500 BC because of the depiction of those weapons in paintings in a cave that was blocked around 2500 BC. The implication here is that the paintings must have been made before the cave was blocked.

A weakens by undermining that implication. If another entrance remained open, it is possible that the painters were made AFTER 2500 BC, which would undermine the conclusion.

I think E could potentially weaken as well, but the fact that identification was difficult does not mean the archaeologists could not eventually correctly identify the weapons.
Last edited by Bill@VeritasPrep on Tue May 08, 2012 6:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Join Veritas Prep's 2010 Instructor of the Year, Matt Douglas for GMATT Mondays

Visit the Veritas Prep Blog

Try the FREE Veritas Prep Practice Test

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 462
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2011 1:08 pm
Thanked: 10 times
Followed by:4 members

by confuse mind » Tue May 08, 2012 5:32 pm
Bill@VeritasPrep wrote:The stimulus draws the conclusion that Type C bronze weapons were in the area before 2500 BC because of the depiction of those weapons in paintings in a cave that was blocked around 2500 BC. The implication here is that the paintings must have been made before the cave was blocked.

A weakens by undermining that implication. If another entrance remained open, it is possible that the painters were made AFTER 2500 BC, which would undermine the conclusion.

I think E weakens as well, but the fact that identification was difficult does not mean the archaeologists could not eventually correctly identify the weapons.

@Bill, I do not agree with your last statement, particularly E as well.
In GMAT, strictly one statement weakens and not others. Being as expert/instructor, you should refrain from giving wrong impressions in public forums and be more precise in your words.

E is not weakening the conclusion of this statement. The conclusion is regarding the date and E does not weaken that in any case!!!

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1248
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 2:57 pm
Location: Everywhere
Thanked: 503 times
Followed by:192 members
GMAT Score:780

by Bill@VeritasPrep » Tue May 08, 2012 6:34 pm
I should have worded it as "could potentially weaken" since I explained how it doesn't actually weaken.

I would, however, take issue with your statement that only one statement weakens. In fact, common question stems indiciate that this is not necessarily true:

Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken...?

It is entirely possible that multiple answers weaken or appear to weaken, but we are looking for the one that does so to the greatest degree. Similarly, we may see multiple answers on strengthen questions that appear to support the conclusion, but we are looking for the one that provides the most direct support.
Join Veritas Prep's 2010 Instructor of the Year, Matt Douglas for GMATT Mondays

Visit the Veritas Prep Blog

Try the FREE Veritas Prep Practice Test

User avatar
Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2010 6:13 pm

by ramprakaashk » Thu May 17, 2012 8:06 pm
Why not B ?? If that instrument is used in India and the people lived in area depicted it as picture, so we can conclude that the picture was a depiction of something not used in China but rather in some other place..

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 1248
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2012 2:57 pm
Location: Everywhere
Thanked: 503 times
Followed by:192 members
GMAT Score:780

by Bill@VeritasPrep » Fri May 18, 2012 7:11 am
ramprakaashk wrote:Why not B ?? If that instrument is used in India and the people lived in area depicted it as picture, so we can conclude that the picture was a depiction of something not used in China but rather in some other place..
The stimulus does not say that it was only used in China. The fact that it may also have been used in India is irrelevant.
Join Veritas Prep's 2010 Instructor of the Year, Matt Douglas for GMATT Mondays

Visit the Veritas Prep Blog

Try the FREE Veritas Prep Practice Test