PT151 S3 Q15 ExplanationSome food historians conclude that

Answer choices, explained

1. A

   Too Strong: solely25% picked this

   It rejects a view held by some food historians solely on the grounds that there is insufficient

   When an answer says "solely / merely" on the grounds that, it means that there was only one premise. This author has two premises (few other surviving recipes / A might have been an atypical chef like some famous modern ones). Seeing two premise indicators, "since" and "after all", also can tell us we had more than one premise. F.A.B.S. = the four main premise indicators for, after all, because, since

   25%
2. B

   Contradicted1% picked this

   It offers support for a view held by some food historians by providing a modern

   This is not offering support for a view held by some food historians. Our author is rebutting their view, and the modern analogue is supporting her rebuttal of a view held by some food historians.

   1%
3. C

   Correct72% picked this

   It takes issue with the view of some food historians by providing a modern analogue that

   Why this is right

   Does it take issue with the view of some food historians? Yes, this conclusion is far too hasty. Does she provide a modern analogue that undercuts their view? Yes, the recipes of Apicius may have been highly atypical (undercuts their view) just like the recipes of many notable modern chefs (a modern analogue)

   Skill tested: Method · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   72%
4. D

   Bad Conclusion Match1% picked this

   It uses a conclusion drawn by some food historians as the basis for a conclusion

   Is the conclusion about a modern analogue? No the conclusion is saying "it's hasty to think that the recipes from ancient Roman Apicius are a reliable indicator of how wealthy ancient Romans prepped their food." And our author doesn't use the food historians' conclusion as the basis for her own conclusion. She uses two premises to undermine the food historians' conclusion.

   1%
5. E

   Bad Conclusion Match2% picked this

   It tries to bolster a conclusion about the similarity of historical times to modern times by comparing a conclusion drawn by some

   Is the conclusion claiming a similarity between historical times and modern times? Nope, it's saying that the conclusion drawn by food historians about ancient Rome is a dubious one.

   2%