For over two centuries, no one had been able to make Damascus blades—blades with a distinctive serpentine surface pattern—but a...

GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions

Source: Official Guide

Critical Reasoning

Strengthen

MEDIUM

...

Notes

Post a Query

For over two centuries, no one had been able to make Damascus blades—blades with a distinctive serpentine surface pattern—but a contemporary sword maker may just have rediscovered how. Using iron with trace impurities that precisely matched those present in the iron used in historic Damascus blades, this contemporary sword maker seems to have finally hit on an intricate process by which he can produce a blade indistinguishable from a true Damascus blade.

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest support for the hypothesis that trace impurities in the iron are essential for the production of Damascus blades?

There are surface features of every Damascus blade—including the blades produced by the contemporary sword maker—that are unique to that blade.

The iron with which the contemporary sword maker made Damascus blades came from a source of iron that was unknown two centuries ago.

Almost all the tools used by the contemporary sword maker were updated versions of tools that were used by sword makers over two centuries ago.

Production of Damascus blades by sword makers of the past ceased abruptly after those sword makers' original source of iron became exhausted.

Although Damascus blades were renowned for maintaining a sharp edge, the blade made by the contemporary sword maker suggests that they may have maintained their edge less well than blades made using what is now the standard process for making blades.

Solution

Passage Analysis:

Text from Passage Analysis

For over two centuries, no one had been able to make Damascus blades—blades with a distinctive serpentine surface pattern—but a contemporary sword maker may just have rediscovered how.

What it says: Damascus blades haven't been made for 200+ years, but someone today might have figured it out

What it does: Sets up the historical mystery and introduces a potential breakthrough

What it is: Author's opening claim establishing the context

Using iron with trace impurities that precisely matched those present in the iron used in historic Damascus blades, this contemporary sword maker seems to have finally hit on an intricate process by which he can produce a blade indistinguishable from a true Damascus blade.

What it says: The modern sword maker used iron with the same trace impurities as old Damascus blades and created identical results

What it does: Provides the key evidence - connects the breakthrough to matching trace impurities

What it is: Author's explanation of the method and result

Visualization: Historic Damascus: Iron + specific trace impurities → serpentine pattern blade
Modern attempt: Iron + same trace impurities → identical serpentine pattern blade

Argument Flow:

We start with a historical puzzle - Damascus blades couldn't be made for centuries. Then we get evidence of a breakthrough where someone matched the original trace impurities and successfully recreated the blades.

Main Conclusion:

There isn't actually a main conclusion here - this passage presents evidence that could support the hypothesis that trace impurities are essential for Damascus blade production.

Logical Structure:

This passage provides circumstantial evidence through a case study. The logic is: if matching the trace impurities led to success after centuries of failure, this suggests those impurities might be essential. However, we need to strengthen this connection to fully support the hypothesis.

Prethinking:

Question type:

Strengthen - We need to find evidence that makes the hypothesis more believable that trace impurities in iron are essential for making Damascus blades

Precision of Claims

The key claim is about causation - that trace impurities are 'essential' for producing Damascus blades with their distinctive serpentine pattern. This is a strong causal claim about necessity.

Strategy

Since we want to strengthen that trace impurities are essential, we need evidence showing that without these specific trace impurities, you can't make Damascus blades. The best way to strengthen a claim about something being 'essential' is to show what happens when that element is missing or different. We should look for scenarios that demonstrate the trace impurities are necessary, not just correlated with success.

Answer Choices Explained

There are surface features of every Damascus blade—including the blades produced by the contemporary sword maker—that are unique to that blade.

This doesn't strengthen the hypothesis about trace impurities being essential. It just tells us that each blade has unique features, but doesn't connect these features to the trace impurities. We could have unique features for many reasons - variations in technique, timing, temperature, etc. This doesn't help us understand whether trace impurities are essential.

The iron with which the contemporary sword maker made Damascus blades came from a source of iron that was unknown two centuries ago.

This actually weakens our hypothesis rather than strengthens it. If the iron source was unknown two centuries ago, how could historical Damascus blade makers have used iron with the same trace impurities? This creates a logical problem rather than supporting the essentiality of trace impurities.

Almost all the tools used by the contemporary sword maker were updated versions of tools that were used by sword makers over two centuries ago.

This suggests that tools and technique might be the key factors, not the trace impurities in the iron. If the same tools lead to success, maybe the iron composition isn't as essential as we thought. This potentially weakens rather than strengthens our hypothesis.

Production of Damascus blades by sword makers of the past ceased abruptly after those sword makers' original source of iron became exhausted.

This perfectly strengthens our hypothesis! The key word is 'abruptly' - this suggests that when the specific iron source was gone, production immediately stopped. If other factors were more important (like technique or tools), we'd expect a more gradual decline as knowledge was lost over time. The immediate cessation when the iron source was exhausted strongly suggests that the specific iron (with its trace impurities) was essential for production.

This information about edge retention doesn't help us understand whether trace impurities are essential for creating the distinctive serpentine pattern that defines Damascus blades. The quality comparison is irrelevant to the production method question we're trying to strengthen.

Rate this Solution

Tell us what you think about this solution

...

Forum Discussions

Start a new discussion

Post

Previous Attempts

Loading attempts...

Text from Passage	Analysis
For over two centuries, no one had been able to make Damascus blades—blades with a distinctive serpentine surface pattern—but a contemporary sword maker may just have rediscovered how.	What it says: Damascus blades haven't been made for 200+ years, but someone today might have figured it out What it does: Sets up the historical mystery and introduces a potential breakthrough What it is: Author's opening claim establishing the context
Using iron with trace impurities that precisely matched those present in the iron used in historic Damascus blades, this contemporary sword maker seems to have finally hit on an intricate process by which he can produce a blade indistinguishable from a true Damascus blade.	What it says: The modern sword maker used iron with the same trace impurities as old Damascus blades and created identical results What it does: Provides the key evidence - connects the breakthrough to matching trace impurities What it is: Author's explanation of the method and result Visualization: Historic Damascus: Iron + specific trace impurities → serpentine pattern blade Modern attempt: Iron + same trace impurities → identical serpentine pattern blade