PT149 S4 Q21 ExplanationLiterary critic: There is little

Answer choices, explained

1. A

   Out of Scope: should2% picked this

   An artist who wants to engage the moral sensibilities of his or her audience should not assume that forms of artistic expression that previously

   Phew, a quick bailout with "should". The author doesn't use any normative language, so we're not allowed to be assigning her any normative assumptions. She is just describing contemporary novels as lacking in social significance. That doesn't necessarily mean that the author thinks that contemporary novels should change. I could describe how Starburst candy is devoid of nutritional value but not be assuming "Starburst should put more protein and vitamins in their candy".

   2%
2. B

   Out of Scope: should21% picked this

   A novelist who wants to make a reader empathize with a victim of injustice should avoid sensationalistic spectacles whose only purpose is to make

   Awesome, another answer with "should". The author doesn't use any normative language, so we're not allowed to be assigning her any normative assumptions. She is just describing contemporary novels as lacking in social significance. She doesn't need to make any assumptions about what "should" be the case.

   21%
3. C

   Weaker Trigger Match18% picked this

   A work of art is socially important only if it engages the moral sensibilities

   This is fairly close. It's saying doesn't engage moral → not socially sensibilities of audience important The conclusion is essentially saying can't experience world little of from moral perspective → social of novel's characters significance The outcomes are pretty interchangeable. If we know something is not socially important, then we can definitely support the idea that there's "little of social significance". But the trigger doesn't match. As an audience member, having your moral sensibilities engaged is very different from experiencing the world from the moral perspective of a character. Perhaps a character is having an affair, but they feel justified in doing so because they blame their spouse for a loveless marriage. They don't consider their affair wrong. An audience member experiencing the world from the moral perspective of that character would agree there's nothing wrong with the affair. But a different audience member might be repulsed by the affair and think that the character is totally wrong for betraying their spouse. That audience member still had their moral sensibilities engaged, but didn't experience the world from the moral perspective of the character.

   18%
4. D

   Reversed Logic15% picked this

   If a novel allows a reader to understand injustice from the point of view of its victims, it

   This is the ol' Illegal Lightswitch move, where they flip both ideas. The argument was close to saying novel doesn't allow reader there is to understand justice from → not much point of view of victims social significance And this answer is just illegally flipping both ideas to get, if novel does allow → there is social significance

   15%
5. E

   Correct44% picked this

   Novels have social significance only to the extent that they allow readers to enter the internal world

   Why this is right

   This is one of those original two assumptions we pulled out of the first sentence. It's weird that this correct answer is internal to the first sentence and doesn't really make use of the second one. I can't really remember another example of that. The word "for" in the first sentence (of FABS fame ... for, after all, because, since) shows that the first clause is a conclusion being supported by what comes after "for". The author is indicating that whether or not a novel has much social significance is related to whether or not readers can enter the internal world of the novelist's mind. The author's overall argument is trying to say that, when it comes to contemporary novels ... moral transgressions are not events whose purpose is to be seen as moral injustices, and thus you don't experience the novel's world from the moral perspective of the novel's characters and thus you can't cant enter the internal world of the novelist's mind, and thus there is little of social significance. This answer provides that last link.

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

   44%