Law School Discussion

TM HW (Type 4)

frankm007

TM HW (Type 4)
« on: August 10, 2005, 08:05:24 AM »
I've made more mistakes than I wanted to make in this section and I am analyzing the answers now...

for page 34,

28) Concetta: Franchot was a great writer becahse she was ahead of her time in understanding that industrialization was taking an unconsciouanble toll on the fmaily structure of the working class.

Alicia: Francho was not a great writer. The mark of a great writer is the ability to move people with the power of the written word, not the ability to be among the first to grasp a social issue. Besides, the social consequences of industrialization were widely understood in Franchot's day.

In her disagreement with Concetta, Alicia does which one of the following?

B) discredits Concetta's evidence and then generalizes from new evidence
C) rejects Conetta's criterion and then dispuses a specific claim
D) disputes Concetta's conclusion and then presents facts in support of an alternative criterion.



Before moving to the answers I formulated in my head that Alicia basically disagrees with Concetta's conclusion that Franchot was a great writer by citing the criteria she based her conclusion was irrelevant...


wait... this is exactly what C says... =(  Damn... see, why do i not do this right on these questions and find the right answer...argh!!


C) rejects Conetta's criterion (understanding industrailization) and then dispuses a specific claim (Franchot was a great writer)



yes?

River

  • ****
  • 359
    • View Profile
Re: TM HW (Type 4)
« Reply #1 on: August 10, 2005, 08:26:12 AM »
I've made more mistakes than I wanted to make in this section and I am analyzing the answers now...

for page 34,

28) Concetta: Franchot was a great writer becahse she was ahead of her time in understanding that industrialization was taking an unconsciouanble toll on the fmaily structure of the working class.

Alicia: Francho was not a great writer. The mark of a great writer is the ability to move people with the power of the written word, not the ability to be among the first to grasp a social issue. Besides, the social consequences of industrialization were widely understood in Franchot's day.

In her disagreement with Concetta, Alicia does which one of the following?

B) discredits Concetta's evidence and then generalizes from new evidence
C) rejects Conetta's criterion and then dispuses a specific claim
D) disputes Concetta's conclusion and then presents facts in support of an alternative criterion.



Before moving to the answers I formulated in my head that Alicia basically disagrees with Concetta's conclusion that Franchot was a great writer by citing the criteria she based her conclusion was irrelevant...


wait... this is exactly what C says... =(  Damn... see, why do i not do this right on these questions and find the right answer...argh!!


C) rejects Conetta's criterion (understanding industrailization) and then dispuses a specific claim (Franchot was a great writer)



yes?

"in understanding that industrialization"  V.S. "the ability to move"=criterion

Concetta says F is a great writer because,,;   Alicia says "no, becaues,,,,=claim

So both dispute a specific claim(being a great writer) based on criterion(above). 

You are right!!

lsatlover

Re: TM HW (Type 4)
« Reply #2 on: August 10, 2005, 10:26:31 AM »

yes, the order is important