Theorist: Hatred and anger, grief

Answer choices

1. A

   Out of Scope3% picked this

   It is a generalization a particular instance of which is cited by the argument in order to undermine the viewpoint

   Out of Scope: generalization of instance Too Strong: view the argument attacks A generalization of a particular instance would be, "Eddie played guitar and the only thing that happened was vibrating sound waves. Thus, music is merely sound." We don't have any particular example of music only being sound, so this claim we're asked about is not a generalization of a particular instance. Furthermore, it's too strong or too much of a stretch to say the argument is attacking a viewpoint. The author is definitely saying that it would be incorrect to think that music conveys specific emotions like love vs. joy, but that idea hasn't been attributed to some viewpoint, so there's no one here for the author to "attack".

   3%
2. B

   Wrong Role8% picked this

   It is a portion of the conclusion drawn in

   It's not part of the conclusion. Yes, it's found in the same sentence as the conclusion, but that doesn't make it part of the conclusion. Consider this argument: We should order sushi, because Jen loves sushi. The conclusion is "we should order sushi" and the support is "Jen loves sushi". We can't say that "Jen loves sushi" is a portion of the conclusion. It's a portion of the argument, yes. The conclusion of this argument ends and the support for it begins at the support indicator "for".

   8%
3. C

   Correct68% picked this

   It is a claim that is offered as partial support for

   Why this is right

   This just says that our claim is one of the supporting ideas. We agree! If anyone rejected this because they were like, "Well, yes that's true, but ...", there's not really that sort of rationale for getting rid of Role answers. They're just true or not. There might be zero or almost zero cases in which we've eliminated an answer by saying, "That's true, but it's not the best true answer available". Pretty much always, if it matches we pick it.

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

   68%
4. D

   Out of Scope20% picked this

   It is a generalization the truth of which is claimed to be necessary to establish the

   Out of Scope: claimed to be necessary The author never claimed that "music needs to be seen as merely sound" in order for it to be true that "the meaning of a piece of music is the core of the emotion it elicits". This answer isn't saying that "music is just sound" is necessary; it's specifically saying that the author claimed that "music is just sound" is necessary, which definitely did not happen.

   20%
5. E

   Opposite: rejected1% picked this

   It is a hypothesis that must be rejected, according to the argument, because it is

   The author isn't rejecting the idea that "music is merely sound". The author is explicitly using it as support for the the conclusion. She argued, "So claim 1, for claim 2 and therefore claim 3".

   1%