medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
A historian contends that the empire collapsed because its silver mines ran dry. In support, the historian points out that the period of the empire's decline lined up precisely with the years in which the output of those mines fell sharply.
Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the historian's argument?
- The empire's armies had been steadily losing fighting capacity for several decades before silver output ever began to drop.
- Neighboring empires whose silver mines were similarly exhausted nevertheless did not collapse during the same era.
- Silver served as the empire's chief medium for trade and for paying its soldiers.
- The dates assigned to the various stages of silver production rest on rough estimates rather than exact bookkeeping.
- Coins minted late in the empire's history contained noticeably less silver than those minted at its height.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from the statements above?
- The question type just described is best identified as which one of the following?
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the argument
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship the statement establ
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?
- Which one of the following must be true given the statement above?