#22 - Must Be True, Purpose/Function

[sabinarose99]

I had a lot of trouble with this question and thought E seemed better than C.

Wouldn't Elsa say, NO it's not wise for contempt public art to help achieve a consensus because...it's not the right solution (right solution would be to emphasize differences) and moreover, it's impossible
And in that same light, Laurie would say, YES, it's wise for public art to achieve a consensus because... if it doesn't do this, it failed.

I understand why C is right, sort of? Laurie's criterion of success of public art would be for it to bring about a consensus and Elsa doesn't agree with that criterion. However, I don't know Elsa's criterion of success, do I? And do I need to? Elsa also does not mention being in a democracy, just says that if people have different opinions, embrace it because public art can't bring about a consensus.

Again....I"m still sort of confused. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

[katehos]

Hi Sabina!

Before I get into the question, I just wanted to let you know that I think you might have posted this question on the RC thread instead of the LR thread! Here's the link to the thread for this question in LR: https://forum.powerscore.com/viewtopic ... 10&t=28108

Now, into the good stuff! Off the bat, we don't have enough information to know whether or not Elsa would say it is NOT wise for contemporary public art to achieve consensus. Elsa did not mention that art should not seek consensus, only that it should emphasize differences if people hold radically different opinions. Additionally, there's no mention of whether or not this would be 'wise,' just that it should be the case. Laurie, on the other hand, thinks it's impossible for contemporary public art to even create consensus, so it's hard to say she would agree it is wise for contemporary public art to do so. Bottom line: what one should do may not equal what is wise.

In terms of answer choice (C), we can find Elsa's criterion of success in her first claim: public art should emphasize radically different opinions, assuming people hold them. Additionally, since Elsa does not limit her claim only to people in a democracy, we know that the scope of her claim applies to all situations in which people hold radically different opinions, so it applies to a democracy! Laurie's opinion, on the other hand, is specific to democracies, so it cannot necessarily be applied to other types of societies.

I hope that helps!
Kate