#7 - Antonio: One can live a life of moderation by never

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Point at Issue. The correct answer choice is (B).

Antonio claims that it is possible to live a life of moderation by never deviating from the middle course, but that doing so causes one to lose out on certain opportunities. Marla responds that Antonio's suggested "life of moderation" is not actually a life of moderation, because someone living that way would not be moderate about how much moderation they engage in.

It should be noted that neither of the two speakers makes a case for what is good, or better, or what anyone ought to do. Despite Antonio's references to joy, this stimulus is entirely about facts - what defines a life of moderation, and, in Antonio's case, what that can cost. Faced with a Point at Issue question, the only thing that these two clearly disagree about is the definition of a life of moderation. They disagree about Antonio's first statement of fact. Do not make any assumptions about what opinions either of these speakers may hold, other than those they expressed.

Answer choice (A): Neither party takes a position on what is desirable, so this cannot be the point at issue.

Answer choice (B): This is the correct answer choice. This fact-based answer captures the point at issue nicely, as Antonio thinks a life of moderation requires always taking the middle course, while Marla thinks that such a life is not actually a true life of moderation. Presumably, Marla thinks a life of moderation requires occasionally being a bit extreme.

Answer choice (C): Neither speaker takes a position on the possibility of other virtues.

Answer choice (D): Neither Antonio nor Marla expresses an opinion about what anyone ought to do.

Answer choice (E): Just like answer A, neither of the speakers takes a position on what is or is not desirable.

[BoomBoom]

Hello,

I was wondering how B is a better answer than D? If someone could explain this I would appreciate it.

Thanks,

Chris

[Nikki Siclunov]

Chris,

Thanks for your question. Generally speaking, we need a bit more input from you before we delve into a discussion of a particular LR question. Ultimately, it won't be us who are taking the test; it's you! Our goal is to help you understand what's going on, which is why you first need to do the following:

• 1. Describe your approach to the stimulus. Did you understand the argument, if any, from a structural standpoint? What is the conclusion, and what evidence is the author using in support of that conclusion?
  
  2. Did you prephrase an answer to the question in the stem? If so, what was your prephrase?
  
  3. What exactly made the two answer choices you have listed particularly attractive? Did you use any question type-specific test (e.g. Assumption Negation Technique) to differentiate between them?

Thanks,

[BoomBoom]

Hello,

1. Initially I set it up in my head as follows,

Antonio
P: But then one loses the joy of spontaneity and misses the opportunities that come to those who are occasionally willing to take great chances, or to go too far.

C: One can live a life of moderation by never
deviating from the middle course

Marla
P: But one who, in the interests of moderation, never risks going too far is actually failing to live a life of moderation.

C: One must be moderate even in one’s moderation.

2. Prephrase: Antonio believes a life of moderation is lived by playing it safe all the time and not taking big risks or chances. Marla believes that to live a life of moderation you have to have a balance between sometimes taking big risks and sometimes playing it safe. Therefore, they would disagree on what constitutes a life of moderation.

3. At first glance, I kept answers B and D as contenders. I liked B because it summed up my prephrase but D is the answer I chose because it seemed to sum up the main point of the disagreement better than B.

Perhaps you could point out where I went wrong in my analysis and how to best attack these answer choices to select the best possible answer.

Thanks,

Chris