It is the mark of a superior conductor

Answer choices

1. A

   Irrelevant Comparison12% picked this

   Superior conductors devise different interpretations of a composition for each orchestra with which

   It doesn't make a difference to this position whether superior conducts use the same interpretation with different orchestras or whether they vary it for each ensemble. All the author cares about is that the conductor earns the respect of each ensemble for whatever artistic interpretation he/she is shooting for.

   12%
2. B

   Too Strong: never / any2% picked this

   Superior conductors are perfectionists who are never satisfied with any performance even by

   This answer is insanely strong. They're never satisfied with any performance? Negating this would mean, "There has been at least one time in history when a superior conductor was satisfied with a performance." That negation wouldn't weaken the position at all, so this answer clearly doesn't need to be assumed.

   2%
3. C

   Too Strong: always12% picked this

   Top orchestras are always ready to put in additional work on rehearsals if the conductor

   This answer is way too strong and doesn't even limit itself to superior conductors. It's saying for any conductor, if they think additional rehearsals are necessary, then a top orchestra will agree 100% of the time. If we negate this, we're saying, "wellll .... there is at least one case in which a conductor considers additional rehearsals necessary but a top orchestra isn't ready to put in additional work". That doesn't conflict with the author's position at all, so this doesn't need to be assumed.

   12%
4. D

   Correct62% picked this

   Top orchestras can appreciate the merits of an interpretation even before they have brought it

   Why this is right

   The wording here is attractively weak. If we negate it, we'll get a strong idea. Does it weaken for us to say to the author "Hey, buddy, top orchestras cannot appreciate the merit of an interpretation until they've brought it to full realization"? Yes! The author is saying that a top conductor would get the orchestra to apply more effort to rehearsals by earning their respect with the interpretation he/she is pursuing. But that would be an impossible process if orchestras can't evaluate whether they like/respect the interpretation they're pursuing until it's already fully realized (essentially, until after all the rehearsals are done). This answer is essentially stating something that would need to be true for the author's portrayal to be a reality. The superior conductor would first convince the orchestra of the merits of his/her interpretation, which would then convince the orchestra to invest more effort in rehearsals, which would then eventually lead to the interpretation being fully realized. For that to work, the orchestra would have to be able to believe in the end product when they're still at a more-beginning stage in the rehearsal process.

   Skill tested: Necessary Assumption · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   62%
5. E

   Irrelevant Quality12% picked this

   Even top orchestras are not always led by

   This is lovably weak, but the author doesn't care if top orchestras are always led by superior conductors or not always led by superior conductors. The author's position describes what a superior conductor's relationship with a top orchestra would look like, but she is never saying that some top orchestras are led by non-superior conductors (as this answer is saying). If we negated this answer, it wouldn't weaken the author's position to say "top orchestras are always led by superior conductors".

   12%