Muriel: I admire Favilla’s novels

Answer choices

1. A

   No Comment from Person 21% picked this

   whether Favilla has treated a wide variety of subjects in

   John made no specific comments about Favilla, so we'll be able to quickly get rid of any answer dealing specifically with Favilla.

   1%
2. B

   No Support from Either9% picked this

   whether Favilla should be considered a great writer because her style

   Neither person is arguing that Favilla should be considered great.

   9%
3. C

   Correct90% picked this

   whether treating a variety of subjects should be a prerequisite for someone to be considered

   Why this is right

   Muriel would Agree with this, since she is arguing that "since Muriel's subject matter is simply not varied enough, she doesn't deserve to be considered a great writer". ~subject matter varied → ~great writer great writer → subject matter varied We can read this contrapositive like "being a great writer requires have varied subject matter", which means the same as "varied subject matter" is a prerequisite. John, meanwhile, would DISAGREE with this answer choice, since he says that "a great writer does not need any diversity in subject matter". So John explicitly disagrees with this. Muriel implicitly agrees with this, because this is the assumption that underlies her argument.

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

   90%
4. D

   No Support from Either0% picked this

   whether the number of novels that a novelist has written should be a factor in judging whether

   Neither person mentioned the quantity of novels a writer has written, so we couldn't derive that either person has supported this claim.

   0%
5. E

   Out of Scope0% picked this

   whether there are many novelists who are considered to be great but do not deserve

   Out of Scope: wrongly considered great No Support from Either Neither party discusses novelists who are wrongly considered to be great. Muriel mentions one writer whom shouldn't be considered great (in Muriel's view). No one ever said Favilla is considered great, so she doesn't count as a novelists who "is considered great but does not deserve to be". Even if she did, this answer is about many novelists being undeservedly called "great", not about just one of them. John doesn't come close to talking about any actual writers being great / not great / considered great.

   0%