We call this question a disagreement, pointed issue disagreement question.

Really the key word here you just, you know, I guess once you get good enough at this,

you don't really waste a lot of time reading, you just see disagreement.

Um, and but let's read it.

It says the dialogue provides the most support for the claim that Carolyn and Arnold are two speakers.

What do they disagree over?

They disagree over whether the object described by Quinn, which is someone in here,

as a conceptual portrait of John Sir Solsten, what, right, should be considered ours,

should be considered Quinn's work, blah blah blah.

So let's let's see what uh what the two of them say.

By the way, this this is a this is not a hard question type.

Rarely when you get a question type of this, like this, it's it's typically easy.

There there are very very few agreement disagreement questions that are considered difficult.

This one, you know, it's not atypical in that sense.

Carolyn says the artist Mark Quinn has displayed behind a glass plate biologically

replicated fragments of Sir John Solsten's DNA, calling it a conceptual portrait.

So this artist Mark Quinn, you know, is essentially just sort of displaying a a fragment of,

let's see if we can do a double helix strand here, something like right of Solsten's DNA.

And he calls it a conceptual portrait.

And then Carolyn says, but to be a portrait,

something must bear a recognizable resemblance to its subjects.

Okay, so draw the conclusion yourself.

What do you think Carolyn thinks about whether or not this is an actual portrait?

She just stated for you that the necessary condition of a portrait,

it must be that it bears a recognizable resemblance.

And does this thing bear a recognizable resemblance to this thing?

Right? No, the answer is no.

So Carolyn obviously does not think this is a, well, maybe, I mean,

I will hope it's obvious that Carolyn does not think that this is a portrait.

Quinn's conceptual portrait is a maximally realistic portrait is a portrait.

So as you see, that's already disagreement.

They, Arnold thinks it's a portrait.

Why? Because, because it holds actual instruction according to which Solsten was created.

You know, this is fine.

Like they just have different definitions of what accounts to be a portrait.

Carolyn thinks to be a portrait, you have to be recognizable.

You have to have recognizable resemblance.

And Arnold doesn't think so.

Right?

Arnold thinks it's a portrait because of this reason.

So what do they disagree over?

No, they don't have a discussion about whether it's art.

Should we consider Quinn's work?

I don't think they disputed, right?

For art, they just, neither one talks about it.

So you don't, you actually have, neither one takes a position on whether it's art.

For B, should we consider Quinn's work?

I think they both say yes.

Right?

So there's no disagreement here.

I think they both say that it doesn't bear a recognizable resemblance to Solsten.

No one's going to seriously argue that it's fragment, that a replica of the DNA

actually looks like a person.

D says contains instructions according which Solsten was created.

I think they both agree on this.

I mean, Carolyn's not going to deny biology, I would hope.

And Arnold says it.

So these, so far, neither one takes a position.

They both agree.

They both agree.

They both agree.

Right?

They both agree that this is wrong.

Here, they both agree that these are right.

Yeah.

Carolyn, here, Carolyn says nope.

And Arnold says yep.

And this sort of chart is what we use.

You know, you learn when you look at the lessons on how to do pointed issue questions.

This chart is what we do to, what we use to come to the right answer choice.