Columnist: The relief from the

Answer choices

1. A

   Too Strong: essential1% picked this

   Physical labor is essential to a

   We thought that the author was possibly saying that "life's charm comes in part from doing physical labor", since she seems to think that when modern technology relieves us of the drudgery of physical labor, it undermines/reduces life's charm. But that's not nearly as strong as this answer, which says, "It's impossible to live a fulfilling life without physical labor".

   1%
2. B

   Correct89% picked this

   Self-sufficiency contributes to a person’s

   Why this is right

   This is a Linking answer connecting "more dependent on technology and its underlying energy systems (i.e. less sufficient than before)" with "diminishes overall-wellbeing". If the author thinks that an increase in dependency results in a diminution of well-being, then the author must have believed that there is some connection between self-sufficiency / dependency and well-being. If we negated this answer, it would surely weaken (as all correct answers on NA must do). Negation: Self-sufficiency does not contribute to a person's well being. If self-sufficiency has nothing to do with our well-being, then how could becoming more dependent / less self-sufficient possibly diminish our overall well-being?

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

   89%
3. C

   Out of Scope: free2% picked this

   People are not free if they must depend on anything other than

   No part of this argument is talking about whether or not people are "free", so the author has not committed herself to any views on when people are / aren't "free".

   2%
4. D

   Out of Scope1% picked this

   Anything causing a loss in life’s charm is unjustifiable unless this loss is compensated

   Out of Scope: unjustifiable Too Strong: unless No part of this argument is talking about whether or not modern technology is "justifiable", so the author has not committed herself to any views on what is or isn't justifiable. This answer is very strongly worded (red flag on NA) because it's conditional. We don't try negating conditional answers on NA. We just look at them and ask ourselves whether the author ever made such a reasoning move. This answer says: If a loss in life's then the loss charm is not ? in charm was compensated not justifiable by some gain Neither half of this matches the argument. The premise did not establish that modern technology causes a loss in life's charm without any compensatory gain. And the conclusion isn't saying "Modern technology is not justifiable".

   1%
5. E

   Too Strong: inherently limits8% picked this

   Technology inherently limits the well-being of

   The conclusion is much more limited than this answer. Also, the fact that this answer choice seems so much like a near-rephrasing of the Conclusion can warn us that this is wrong. Correct answers on Necessary Assumption don't sound like a restatement of the conclusion. They either Link language from Premise to Conclusion (or from Premise to Premise), or they rule out a potential objection. The author is only claiming that much modern technology diminishes the well-being of its users. This answer is saying that all technology of any era inherently limits the well-being of its users.

   8%