Arguing that there was no trade between Europe and East Asia in the early Middle Ages because there are no written re...
BatmanNovember 9, 2013
Plz, help
I picked up (e) as a right answer not because I understand what it means and why it was an answer, but because I did it by eliminating the rest of them. So could you please help me to understand why it is answer???
Replies
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
The author claims that "A verifiable sighting of the yeti would prove that the creature does exist, but the absence of sightings cannot prove that it does not." Thus, "Arguing that there was no trade between Europe and East Asia in the early Middle Ages because there are no written records of such trade is like arguing that the yeti...does not exist because there have been no scientifically confirmed sightings."
(E) is the CORRECT answer because it states that there are written records from the early Middle Ages that do not mention trade between the two regions, but would have been very likely to do so if the trade had existed. The passage bases its argument on the fact that the absence of evidence does not prove non-existence. However, the absence of any mention of trade in the written records mentioned in this answer choice actually helps prove non-existence because it would have been very likely that if such a trade did exist, it would have been mentioned. Therefore, if it was not mentioned, it is very likely that the trade did not exist. So, answer choice (E) presents us with a scenario that weakens the authors claim by showing that an absence of evidence could in fact prove non-existence.
Hope that was helpful! Let me know if you have any other questions!
