#10 - Global Reference, Must Be True

[Administrator]

Please post your questions below! Thank you!

[nyc431]

Was wondering if you could help with this. I found both options D and E compelling.

I can see that D fits - similar arguments about lying needed in certain lit genres -- historical novels and autobiographies.

But I can also see how E would fit. The "same principles" being that lying is necessary when writing both a historical novel or autobiography. And the unethical view in B is a different view "in practice." But should the unethical part about lying in B be interpreted as a principle -- and because this is absent from A, the passages don't have the same principles?

[atierney]

With regard to E, it's not clear exactly what conflicting interpretations exist as to principles endorsed. They each endorse the necessity of telling lies to produce quality narratives in different contexts, and the differences within their arguments, to my reading, are based upon these contextual distinctions. Thus, D is the best answer here. As to the point about the differing principles, while the author of B does mention the unethical nature of lying, ultimately recants the position in the next sentence.

Let me know if you have further questions.

[nyc431]

That's helpful, thank you!

[Lmf249]

I was between C and D for this question and ultimately chose C. I understand how D can be correct, as A applied the theme to the context of using falsehood to enhance a novel and B applied the theme to the creation of an autobiography. I ultimately selected C because of the opposing conclusions that A ultimately accepts lying as necessary/good in some contexts, whereas B concludes it's unethical but inescapable. Could someone break down the decision-making process for me? Thanks!

[atierney]

Hi,

Yes, even as stated in your post, I wouldn't say the arguments are in opposition. The idea is that sometimes lying is necessary, as both arguments conclude, and while B specifies lying's unethical nature, nothing in A's argument refutes this.

Let me know if you have further questions on this.

[lounalola]

I picked E for this one and I understand why it is wrong, however how are the arguments in the passages roughly parallel as it says in answer D?

[Adam Tyson]

They are roughly parallel in that they are both arguing that it is necessary in certain circumstances, when writing a certain kind of book, to lie. The arguments aren't identical, but they are fairly similar, even though they deal with different genres and diverge on some points, like author A finding mistakes unforgivable, while author B finds them acceptable and even more trueful, in a way, than objective truth.

You don't have to love answer D. You can quibble with it and say the arguments are different in some crucial ways, and that they therefore aren't parallel. But they are similar in important ways, too, and it's still a better answer than any of the others, which makes it a winner.