Critic: The contemporary novel is

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct77% picked this

   Since no government has been able to regulate either employment or inflation very closely, it is impossible for any government

   Why this is right

   This might not seem super appealing or relevant on a first pass, but the conclusion is a strong broad statement about all governments. The evidence does not match the original in terms of discussing sub-genres of government. Instead, the matching flaw is the missing link between what the evidence says something was incapable of doing and what the conclusion says something is incapable of doing. ORIGINAL They haven't had any social significance or broken the formula ... thus, they are incapable of making an important new contribution. OBJECTION Is "social significance / breaking the formula" the only way to make an important new contribution? THIS ANSWER They haven't been able to closely regulate employment or inflation ... thus, they are incapable of improving the nation's economy. OBJECTION Is "closely regulating employment or inflation" the only ways to improve an economy? This answer would only win, for me, after all the others lose.

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

   77%
2. B

   Bad Conclusion Match2% picked this

   Because there has been substantial progress in recent years in making machines more efficient, it is only a matter of time before

   The conclusion is not a harshly worded claim about some broad type of thing. The contemporary novel is incapable of doing X is a poor match for It's only a matter of time before we invent X

   2%
3. C

   Bad Conclusion Match10% picked this

   The essayist Macaulay was as widely read in his time as Dickens, but has been neglected since. Thus writers who are popular today are

   The conclusion is not definitive in its wording the way the original conclusion was. The contemporary novel is incapable of doing X is a poor match for Today's popular writers are likely to be forgotten in the future. Also the relationship between evidence and conclusion is more of a, "Because it was true in the past, it will be true in the future" vibe. In the original argument, it was, "Because these things failed to do X, they are incapable of doing Y."

   10%
4. D

   Bad Conclusion Match5% picked this

   This politician has not made any proposals for dealing with the problem of unemployment and thus must not

   The conclusion is not a harshly worded claim about some broad type of thing. The contemporary novel is incapable of doing X is a poor match for This politician must not think the problem is important Our objection to this argument would be more like, "You can't assume that causal explanation for why the politician hasn't made proposals. She might think the problem is important but have failed to make proposals for some different reason." Our objection the original argument was, "Just because they've failed to do one specific thing, how does that prove that they're incapable of doing anything belonging to this broader category?"

   5%
5. E

   Weak Objection Match6% picked this

   In international commerce, the corporations that are best suited for success are large and multinational. Thus small corporations cannot

   This conclusion feels pretty on point. It's saying that a broad category of things (small corporations) is incapable of doing something (competing at the international level). Does the evidence say, "After all, small corporations can't do X / can't do Y"? Not quite. It indirectly says, "After all, small corporations are not best suited for success". Not only does the evidence match more weakly, since the evidence doesn't even directly mention small corporations, but it feels like our objection here would sound more like "Just because they're not best suited doesn't mean they can't compete. Sometimes the underdog still makes it competitive." Our objection in the original argument and correct answer was more like, "Just because they can't do X doesn't mean they can't do Y. Aren't there other ways of doing Y, besides just X?"

   6%