Tennyson's line of poetry

Answer choices

1. A

   Bad Conclusion Match4% picked this

   It casts doubt on whether the theory of evolution should be attributed

   The 2nd and 3rd sentences are both premises that are meant to cast doubt on what "many evolutionists" are saying in the 1st sentence. So it's meant to cast doubt on the idea that Tennyson meant "nature, red in tooth and claw" as a reference to Darwin. This argument is never trying to argue that the theory of evolution shouldn't be attributed to Darwin alone.

   4%
2. B

   Bad Conclusion Match5% picked this

   It supports the claim that creationist theories of biology were dominant in the

   The 2nd and 3rd sentences are both premises that are meant to support the Conclusion claim in the 1st sentence. So we could say "it supports the claim that Tennyson did not mean 'nature, red in tooth and claw' as a reference to Darwin." This answer is saying that the author's conclusion was that "creationist theories were dominant in the early 19th century".

   5%
3. C

   Correct88% picked this

   It provides reason to believe that Tennyson did not know about Darwin's theory when the

   Why this is right

   This answer doesn't give us the straightforward description like, "The 2nd sentence is one of the premises. The conclusion is the 1st sentence." Instead, it engages more with the meaning, with the logic of how the 2nd sentence supports the 1st sentence. In the 1st sentence, the author is claiming that Tennyson was not making a Darwin reference with the "red in tooth and claw" line. How is the 2nd sentence supposed to help persuade us of that? It's supposed to make us think that there's no way that Tennyson could have even known what Darwin's theory was at the time that Tennyson wrote that line (since Darwin's theory was a secret until it was published and wasn't published until 9 years after that Tennyson line was published).

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

   88%
4. D

   Out of Scope: provided inspiration1% picked this

   It suggests that Tennyson's line provided Darwin with the inspiration for

   The author is bringing up the dates to support the idea that Tennyson was not making a reference to Darwin's theory in that 1850 line about "nature, red in tooth and claw". She isn't bringing up the dates to suggest that Tennyson's line in 1850 inspired Darwin's theory in 1859.

   1%
5. E

   Contradicted, if anything1% picked this

   It implies that Tennyson knew little about the dominant biological theories of

   The 2nd sentence is there to support the 1st (to support the idea that Tennyson's famous line is not an allusion to Darwin). It's not there to imply that Tennyson knew little about dominant biological theories of the 19th century. In fact, the 3rd sentence seems to contradict that idea, because the author is telling us that the famous line is actually an allusion to the dominant biological theory of the early 19th century.

   1%