Excavations of the Roman city of Sepphoris...

[gkumar]

Excavations of the Roman city of Sepphoris have uncovered numerous detailed mosaics depicting several readily identifiable animal species: a hare, a patridge, and various Mediterranean fish. Oddly, most of the species represented did not live in the Sepphoris region when these mosaics were created. Since identical motifs appear in mosaics found in other Roman cities, however, the mosaics of Sepphoris were very likely created by traveling artisans from some other part of the Roman empire.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A. The Sepphoris mosaics are not composed exclusively of types of stones found naturally in teh Sepphoris area
B. There is no single region to which all the species depicted in the Sepphoris mosaics are native
C. No motifs appear in the Sepphoris mosaics that do not also appear in the mosaics of some other Roman city
D. All of the animal figures in the Sepphoris mosiacs are readily identifiable as representation of known species
E. There was not a common repertory of mosaic designs with which artisans who lived in various parts of the Roman empire were familiar

OA is E. I chose B. What is the POE process that can be used here? I felt that this was unusually tricky and narrowed it down to B, D, E

Thanks!

[RonPurewal]

remember that you're looking for REQUIRED ASSUMPTIONS.

here's a very useful criterion to use in these problems:
try REVERSING putative assumptions and see the effect on the argument.
if you REVERSE A REQUIRED ASSUMPTION, the ARGUMENT SHOULD BECOME INVALID.

let's try this with your top 3 choices:

(b)
reverse this assumption: let's say all the species are indigenous to some common region.
this doesn't destroy the argument; it's perfectly consistent with the idea of traveling artisans (who presumably would have come from that common region).
wrong answer.

(d)
reverse this assumption: let's say that there are some animal figures that are not readily identifiable.
this has no effect whatsoever on the argument, which is concerned only with some of the animal figures (i.e., the ones that weren't native to the local area).
wrong answer.

(e)
reverse this assumption: let's say there was a common repertory of mosaic designs.
in this case, that repertory - since it was a common repertory - would have included animal figures from all over the place. (at the very least, it would be quite unreasonable to expect a common repertory to have been restricted to animal figures from the sepphoris area in particular.)
this destroys the argument, because, were there such a repertory, then artists local to sepphoris would have followed it as well, creating the exotic designs despite their status as natives in the area.
correct answer.

[gkumar]

Hi Ron,

Thanks for your excellent and detailed reply. I will have to learn how to negate CR answer choices and apply them. Also I will have to learn how to reverse the assumptions as well like in this question.

[JonathanSchneider]

: )

[sudaif]

I C wrong b/c there has been a switch-up in the terms
specifically ... if it said that "No mosaics (instead of motifs) appear in the Sepphoris mosaics that do not also appear in the motifs (instead of mosaics) of some other Roman city"
would that also be a valid assumption!?!
Expedited response appreciated!

[RonPurewal]

I C wrong b/c there has been a switch-up in the terms
specifically ... if it said that "No mosaics (instead of motifs) appear in the Sepphoris mosaics that do not also appear in the motifs (instead of mosaics) of some other Roman city"
would that also be a valid assumption!?!
Expedited response appreciated!

actually, no, that wouldn't make sense at all.

a "motif" is a theme seen in a piece of artwork; a "mosaic" is a type of artwork. so you can have a motif in a mosaic, but it wouldn't make any sense to say you can have a mosaic in a motif. (similarly, you can have a tune in a song, but you can't have a song in a tune.)

(c) is not a required assumption just because it's so extreme -- we certainly don't have to assume that NONE of the sepphoris motifs are unique (i.e., not also present in roman mosaics).
remember that assumptions are statements that are REQUIRED for the argument to work; therefore, if you think a statement as extreme as this one might be an assumption, think long and hard about whether that extreme statement is actually REQUIRED in the argument.

[raheel11]

Excavations of the Roman city of Sepphoris have uncovered numerous detailed mosaics depicting several readily identifiable animal species: a hare, a patridge, and various Mediterranean fish. Oddly, most of the species represented did not live in the Sepphoris region when these mosaics were created. Since identical motifs appear in mosaics found in other Roman cities, however, the mosaics of Sepphoris were very likely created by traveling artisans from some other part of the Roman empire.

Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A. The Sepphoris mosaics are not composed exclusively of types of stones found naturally in teh Sepphoris area
B. There is no single region to which all the species depicted in the Sepphoris mosaics are native
C. No motifs appear in the Sepphoris mosaics that do not also appear in the mosaics of some other Roman city
D. All of the animal figures in the Sepphoris mosiacs are readily identifiable as representation of known species
E. There was not a common repertory of mosaic designs with which artisans who lived in various parts of the Roman empire were familiar

OA is E. I chose B. What is the POE process that can be used here? I felt that this was unusually tricky and narrowed it down to B, D, E

Thanks!

Ron,

I agree with the OA but I am trying to figure out how to effectively eliminate C. I tried reversing the assumption technique on C and ended up choosing it as my answer.

Option C reversed:
Motifs appear in the Sepphoris mosaics that do not also appear in the mosaics of some other Roman city

This means that there are some motifs unique to Sepphoris thus making it unlikely that they were made by people traveling from other parts of Rome. This weakens the conclusion and hence, I chose this the answer. Can you pls help me understand the flaw in my strategy for this question, thanks!

[RonPurewal]

Option C reversed:
Motifs appear in the Sepphoris mosaics that do not also appear in the mosaics of some other Roman city

This means that there are some motifs unique to Sepphoris thus making it unlikely that they were made by people traveling from other parts of Rome.

correct up to here.

This weakens the conclusion and hence, I chose this the answer.

this doesn't necessarily weaken the conclusion unless you assume that everything painted by a traveling artisan would also have to appear in the art of that artisan's hometown.

the passage gives no grounds for such an extreme assumption; in fact, note the following excerpt:
most of the species represented did not live in the Sepphoris region
... implying that some of the species represented did live in the sepphoris region. it would be quite reasonable, then, if those particular species appeared in the sepphoris mosaics even if they were absent from the artists' original hometown art.

[iharden]

It just seems like one can justify the correct answer to this question with a number of answers choices. I have a problem with E. It seems that if there were a common repertory of mosaic designs...then it would be more likely that the mosaics were created by traveling artisans, and they gained through trade. Am I completely missing something in this question?

[RonPurewal]

It just seems like one can justify the correct answer to this question with a number of answers choices. I have a problem with E. It seems that if there were a common repertory of mosaic designs...then it would be more likely that the mosaics were created by traveling artisans, and they gained through trade. Am I completely missing something in this question?

nope, exactly the opposite. if there were an established common repertory, then the designs are just as likely to have been created by hometown artists as by traveling artists.

i think what you are trying to do here is explain what would have created that sort of repertory in the first place; while that is certainly an interesting topic to ponder, it is not at issue in the current problem.

[mandy0825]

Could anyone kindly help me understand why a is false? The conclusion is that the mosaics were likely created by traveling artisans. A indicates that these mosaics are not composed of stones that can only be found in the Sepphoris area. If a were true, doesn't that mean these mosaics could be made in Sepphoris so no need for traveling artisans to bring them in?
thanks in advance

[RonPurewal]

Could anyone kindly help me understand why a is false? The conclusion is that the mosaics were likely created by traveling artisans. A indicates that these mosaics are not composed of stones that can only be found in the Sepphoris area. If a were true, doesn't that mean these mosaics could be made in Sepphoris so no need for traveling artisans to bring them in?
thanks in advance

mandy, you should brush up on your basic definitions -- it doesn't seem that you understand what an "assumption" is.
an assumption is something that MUST be true. in other words, this is a problem about what is ABSOLUTELY REQUIRED by the argument.

the way in which you're considering this -- "*if* this is true, then let me hypothesize random consequences of it" -- has nothing to do with assumptions.

it's really important that you understand this stuff, because this sort of thing is actually 100% of the "learning" that you can do in CR. i.e., there are no real "facts" or "rules" that you can memorize; the only thing you can really do in preparation is achieve a total understanding of what the questions are asking you to do.

[ramendra.awesome]

remember that you're looking for REQUIRED ASSUMPTIONS.


(d)
reverse this assumption: let's say that there are some animal figures that are not readily identifiable.
this has no effect whatsoever on the argument, which is concerned only with some of the animal figures (i.e., the ones that weren't native to the local area).
wrong answer.

Hi Ron,

I was looking at this old thread, and I need more help with the explanation of D. First of all, lets assume there are some animal figures which are not readily identifiable. In that case would it be possible to decide whether these animals were native to the place or not. So saying that 'not being identifiable' is not a problem, because we are talking about those animals which were not native is actually self contradicting.

My explanation for rejecting D over E is that this question talks about finding an assumption. An assumption is a piece of information that is not present in the argument, but is actually assumed. Now our question clearly mentions that excavations have depicted several readily identifiable animal figures. So we do not need to assume this information, as it is already clearly mentioned. Your thoughts, please.

[RonPurewal]

The reversal of (D) should say "... not readily identifiable as known species." I guess that, when I wrote that post, I didn't find it necessary to write that all out. My mistake.
In other words, they're still identifiable as animal figures; what's unknown is whether they are/were known species (as opposed to, say, fantasy creatures).

Also, since you're negating a statement about ALL of the animal figures, the negation is "At least some of the figures are not readily identifiable as known animal species."

You can see how this doesn't affect the argument. The argument is concerned only with those figures that ARE identifiable as known animals; the others (if indeed there are others) don't affect the line of reasoning.

[RonPurewal]

My explanation for rejecting D over E is that this question talks about finding an assumption. An assumption is a piece of information that is not present in the argument, but is actually assumed. Now our question clearly mentions that excavations have depicted several readily identifiable animal figures. So we do not need to assume this information, as it is already clearly mentioned. Your thoughts, please.

Incorrect, because choice D says "ALL of the figures". The stated facts are not so extreme; the passage just says that the mosaics contain known animal representations. Nothing rules out the idea that those representations exist alongside representations of unrecognizable, fantastic animals.

On assumption questions, NO answer choice will EVER be a reproduction of existing information. If you think you see one, you're not reading carefully enough.
If an answer choice ever did this, you'd have a quandary, because you do have to assume that all of the statements in the passage are actually true. To avoid that sort of logical quirk, the questions will simply never repeat the original statements. Never ever ever.