Explanation
To address this question, we examine the reasoning behind the use of certain objects as currency, based on their original use. The argument posits that objects initially valued for one purpose, such as adornment, naturally transition to serve as currency, drawing a parallel with beads, gold, silver, and feathers. We're seeking a principle that, if valid, supports the logical progression from an object's original valued use to its adoption as currency.
A. This option discusses the transfer of secondary uses between objects, which is not what the argument is about.
B. While this touches upon the similarity between primary uses, the argument is focused on the transition from a primary use to a derivative use, not the transfer of uses between objects.
C. (Correct Response) This principle supports the argument's reasoning that an object's initial use for decoration is likely to lead to its use as currency, just as with other objects that had similar decorative origins.
D. The argument does not suggest that an object must stop being used for its original purpose to take on a derivative use.
E. This principle discusses the frequency of representation of value, not the transition from one type of valuation (decorative) to another (currency).