Loading...
An archaeological site can be excavated only once, and many sites excavated in the past would have yielded far more information if they had been excavated using current technologies. These considerations have led some to argue that sites that could yield valuable information should not be excavated now since new, archaeologically valuable technologies will almost certainly be developed in the future. Insofar as technological progress is unlikely to stop, consistently following this recommendation over time would
Which of the following most logically completes the reasoning?
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
| An archaeological site can be excavated only once |
|
| and many sites excavated in the past would have yielded far more information if they had been excavated using current technologies |
|
| These considerations have led some to argue that sites that could yield valuable information should not be excavated now |
|
| since new, archaeologically valuable technologies will almost certainly be developed in the future |
|
The argument moves from establishing a constraint (sites can only be excavated once) to showing past mistakes (old technology missed information) to presenting a recommendation (wait for better technology) supported by the inevitability of technological progress.
There isn't a main conclusion in this passage - it presents someone else's recommendation that we should wait to excavate sites until better technology is developed, but the passage itself doesn't take a stance on whether this recommendation is good or bad.
The passage sets up a logical chain: one-time excavation opportunity + past regrets from inferior technology + certainty of future technological advances = recommendation to delay excavation. However, since this is an incomplete argument (asking us to complete the reasoning), we need to think about what would logically follow from consistently applying this "always wait" approach.
Logically Completes - We need to find what would happen if people consistently follow the recommendation to wait for better technology over time
The key claims involve timing (when to excavate), technology progression (continuous improvement), and consequences of consistently waiting
Since this is a 'Logically Completes' question, we need to think through what would logically happen if people keep following this 'wait for better technology' recommendation over and over again. The argument sets up that technology will keep improving, so if we consistently wait, what's the logical outcome? We should trace through the consequences of this repeated waiting behavior.
maximize the archaeologically valuable information obtained through technological advances - This misses the logical trap in the argument. If we consistently wait for better technology, we never actually excavate anything because technology never stops improving. We can't maximize information from advances we never use in practice.
ensure that virtually no archaeologically valuable information at all would be obtained - This correctly identifies the logical consequence of the 'always wait' recommendation. Since technological progress won't stop (as stated in the passage), consistently following the advice to wait means we'll never actually excavate any sites because there will always be better technology coming tomorrow. The result is a perpetual delay that yields no information at all.
guarantee that the number of potential archaeological sites will continue to increase - The recommendation to wait doesn't create more archaeological sites. Sites exist independently of our excavation decisions. This choice confuses delaying excavation with increasing the number of sites available.
encourage archaeologists to make better use of the latest archaeologically valuable technology - This contradicts the logic of the recommendation. If archaeologists are consistently waiting for future technology, they're specifically NOT using the latest current technology. The recommendation discourages using today's technology in favor of waiting.
have the additional benefit of encouraging the development of new archaeologically valuable technologies - The passage gives us no reason to think that waiting to excavate sites would somehow stimulate technological development. This introduces an unsupported causal relationship between excavation delays and technology advancement.