PT119 · S3 · Q8 In jazz history, there have

Why this is right

We could pick this answer from strength of language alone. We're doing a Most Supported task, so we want the weakest language we can work with, since it's easier to support a weak claim than a strong claim. This answer says, "a trait that is X is some settings can do Y in other settings". To support that we only need one example. The trait of "lacking striking ideas" was the trigger for two of our three causal relationships. Not having striking ideas made these gifted pianists bad at leading recording sessions (it was a weakness in the setting of them being the band leader). But not having striking ideas made them good at responding quickly to the ideas of creative but weird leaders. That allowed them to work with those leaders on some of the greatest jazz recordings. (their lack of striking ideas contributed to their achievement of being on classic recordings). One weird part of this match is that the answer compares Setting 1 to Setting 2. Meanwhile, in the conversation we just read, it felt like the setting was the same (a recording session) and what changed was whether the gifted pianist with no ideas was leading the session or was reacting to some quirky genius who was leading the session. It felt more like this answer should say "a trait that's a weakness in one job role can contribute to greatness in another job role". But the term "setting" is inherently vague and malleable, so this is nitpicky and (E) still feels the most supportable.

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