#22 - An effective acting performance does not call the audience’s attention to the fact

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Justify the Conclusion. The correct answer choice is (E).

Answer choice (A):

Answer choice (B):

Answer choice (C):

Answer choice (D):

Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer choice.

This explanation is still in progress. Please post any questions below!

[alphonse92m@gmail.com]

Can someone explain why E is the answer and not B?

[Jeff Wren]

Hi Alphonse,

Let's start by rearranging the premises and conclusion.

P: Effective dramatic performances do not detract from the audience’s appreciation of a play.
P: Calling the audience’s attention to the fact that it is a performance would make it more difficult for the audience to empathize with the character the actor is playing.

C: An effective acting performance does not call the audience’s attention to the fact that it is a performance.

The gap in the argument is between making it more difficult for the audience to empathize with the actor’s character and detracting from the audience’s appreciation of the play. Answer E properly connects those terms and justifies the argument when added to the premises.

Answer B is basically saying if a performance doesn't call attention, then it won't detract. This is a Mistaken Reversal of what we would need to justify the argument. Notice that doesn't call attention (the term in our conclusion) is the sufficient condition here, which is backwards.

[ineedsomehelphere]

Can you clarify why the first sentence is the conclusion? I thought that Effective --> Not Detract was the conclusion

[Adam Tyson]

The reason that the first sentence is the conclusion, ineedsomehelphere, is because the second sentence is meant to support it. Meanwhile, there is no support for the claims in the second sentence. The author expects us to simply accept them as true. A conclusion is only a conclusion if the author gave us a reason to believe it, even a bad reason.

Try looking at it this way: what reason did the author give us to believe that effective dramatic performances do not detract from the audience's appreciation? You won't find any, and that's why it cannot be the conclusion. But if we take the two clauses in the last sentence as premises, and the first sentence as the conclusion, you can see how the author tried to support their position, and also see what's missing.

An argument is a relationship between at least one premise and at least one conclusion. If they don't provide a premise in support of a statement, then the unsupported statement cannot be a conclusion. If a statement does not provide support to another statement, the first statement is not a premise. So, when looking for a conclusion, ask yourself this: what is the supporting premise?

[thomas33]

Could someone please explain this using diagrams?

Thanks

[Jeff Wren]

Hi Thomas,

Sure thing, although I probably wouldn't recommend diagramming this question if possible during the test simply from a time savings point as this one is a bit tricky to diagram.

I'm rearranging the order of the premises and conclusion for clarity.

Premise: Effective dramatic performances do not detract from the audience’s appreciation of a play.

I'd diagram this:

EDP -> not DAAP

(for if effective dramatic performance, then does not detract from the audience’s appreciation of a play)
(Note - I would diagram the necessary term with a slash through "DAAP" rather than writing "not DAAP" if I were diagramming this on scratch paper.)

Premise: Calling the audience’s attention to the fact that it is a performance would make it more difficult for the audience to empathize with the character the actor is playing.

I'd diagram this:

CAFP -> MDEC

(for if calls audience attention to the fact it's a performance, then it makes it more difficult to empathize with character)

The contrapositive of this (which we will be using) would be:

not MDEC -> not CAFP

Conclusion: An effective acting performance does not call the audience’s attention to the fact that it is a performance.

I'd diagram this:

EDP -> not CAFP

(Note- It's important to diagram "effective acting performance" the same way that you diagrammed "effective dramatic performance" in the premise in order for the diagram to link up as these are functionally the same term.)

With this in mind, we want to add an answer that will let us start with "EDP" and link everything together to end up with "not CAFP."

So far, we have

EDP -> not DAAP (missing link) not MDEC -> not CAFP

What is missing is:

not DAAP -> not MDEC

If we had this connection, then everything would link together (if A, then B, then C, then D) to prove our conclusion.

Of course, the answer can also be in the form of the contrapositive when the test makers want to be extra tricky. Answer E is the contrapositive of what we are looking for.

It would be diagrammed:

MDEC -> DAAP

[thomas33]

Thank you, Jeff! Very helpful and much appreciated.