Was torn between B and D. I know that this kind of passage is a "Eliminates choices/alternative" kind and picked D initially. But I realized I read too quickly; D talks about a thesis which isn't discussed. So B is similar but is strictly about the passage.
@CYS1123 simply because they were not stated. The critic is not challenging the professor's assumptions, they are challenging the professor's statements and specifically addressing the conclusion.
@Gracetorres151 I originally chose E as well, and on BR, I realized that I was attracted to it because of how it was the other extreme of A.
I read through A, saw "one" and thought that's not enough...then I sped to E, saw "each" and mentally committed to that AC.
By the time I got around the B, I ruled it out because of the part about the professor not considering the observations.
the problem with E is that the critic does not address each/every premise offered (e.g., rappers can work alone)
what makes B correct is that it accurately describes the critic's reponse
for the tradition claim, the critic says that rap itself is a tradition and that it uses older songs
for the individual claim, the critic says that rappers have to consider the public (a different kind of collaboration that the professor did not consider)
I picked A, does the idea that rap is not performed idiosyncratically and conforms to the public not attack the idea that rap is individualistic and non-traditional?
EDIT: A) doesn't say challenges the conclusion, whoopsie
Rapping to me seems more individualistic. All you need is a pen and paper and lyrical mind, and vocals, and some form of beat and rhyme, and presto! you are a rapper
this was rly simple dont get tripped up yall. He responds by addressing the conclusion (speaks about each point in his conclusion).... so I looked for the ac with conclusion stated and moved on.
got it right, but was 30 seconds over time. was a bit difficult for me to figure out exactly where the conclusions were. once I got that though it made much more sense. gotta get better with my conclusion identifying game
this is the relatively rare instance in which the critic would say the professor's premises are incorrect (they do not work alone, or it is a formal process to learn how to rap). it's usually not going to be the right answer for these questions.
Great question. I believe they would attack the premises directly, just like the person above said. They would attack the premise that they work alone and also the premise that learning rap is not as formal as learning an instrument, lastly the premise that says rappers do not take other musicians into account when creating their music.
If it helps anyone, I went into this question with my strategy for point-of-disagreement questions. I first summarized the professor's argument and then the critics. It is not explicitly stated but the music critic disagrees with the professor's conclusion that rap music is individualistic and non-traditional. From using this strategy, I knew that the method of reasoning had to do with disagreeing or "challenging" the conclusion.
I can see why E is tempting because the critic touches on both aspects mentioned in the conclusion, but the critic mainly attacks the conclusion by showing that there are certain things he forgot to consider when forming his conclusion.
I still dont get how E is wrong. I still read the critic challenging the professor's 2 points
(non traditional and individualistic.)
The critic challenges the non traditional part by stating that rap has in of itself tradition
(which is weak but still a challenge).
The critic challenges the individualistic point by stating that rap music is not individualistic since it conforms to the public's preferences. (also weak but still a challenge)
It states the claims set by the professor, not the conclusion itself. The conclusion being non traditional and individualistic. Essentially, stating the critic does not challenge the conclusion itself, just the premises. I think you have just confused premise for the conclusion because of the grammar being tricky. Hope this helps.
I am getting these right, but feel like I could easily get them wrong. This felt like a 4 star. I had it narrowed down to A and B. Decided on B after 4 minutes. Ended up deciding against A, because the critic actually attacks damn near everything about the argument. So it stating only 1 premise did not seem good enough.
78 comments
Got it right but was over the time by a minute, not bad.
Was torn between B and D. I know that this kind of passage is a "Eliminates choices/alternative" kind and picked D initially. But I realized I read too quickly; D talks about a thesis which isn't discussed. So B is similar but is strictly about the passage.
Got it and with 7 seconds to spare letsss goooooo
I better be the argumentative equivalent of Neo in the matrix when these lessons are over.
But why should I assume that the professor didn't take those factors into account just because he didnt mention them?
@CYS1123 simply because they were not stated. The critic is not challenging the professor's assumptions, they are challenging the professor's statements and specifically addressing the conclusion.
Oh well, the only question I got wrong in this section and I got the BR right. I'll take it as a win
was between B and E and for whatever reason chose E and knew it was wrong and then got the BR correct instantly. how do i stop doing that 🙃
@Gracetorres151 I keep doing the exact same thing
@Gracetorres151 I originally chose E as well, and on BR, I realized that I was attracted to it because of how it was the other extreme of A.
I read through A, saw "one" and thought that's not enough...then I sped to E, saw "each" and mentally committed to that AC.
By the time I got around the B, I ruled it out because of the part about the professor not considering the observations.
the problem with E is that the critic does not address each/every premise offered (e.g., rappers can work alone)
what makes B correct is that it accurately describes the critic's reponse
for the tradition claim, the critic says that rap itself is a tradition and that it uses older songs
for the individual claim, the critic says that rappers have to consider the public (a different kind of collaboration that the professor did not consider)
I picked A, does the idea that rap is not performed idiosyncratically and conforms to the public not attack the idea that rap is individualistic and non-traditional?
EDIT: A) doesn't say challenges the conclusion, whoopsie
Rapping to me seems more individualistic. All you need is a pen and paper and lyrical mind, and vocals, and some form of beat and rhyme, and presto! you are a rapper
that's a big word for elmo
bro i'm cooking these MOR questions Yass
chose A then switched to B during blind review LFG
this was rly simple dont get tripped up yall. He responds by addressing the conclusion (speaks about each point in his conclusion).... so I looked for the ac with conclusion stated and moved on.
@erarabiameyer yeah he immediately attacks the conclusion (tradition) and then provides two new examples.
i immediately prephased that the answer might suggest that he responded by providing an alternative explanation
this section suuuuuuucccked
got it right, but was 30 seconds over time. was a bit difficult for me to figure out exactly where the conclusions were. once I got that though it made much more sense. gotta get better with my conclusion identifying game
@aldertree00644 me too! not just 30 seconds, it was almost a minute until it made sense that the correct one was A!
Me and Bro talking about the new Carti album.
Who is J.Y.'s favorite rapper?
probably yuno miles
@michaelbagh03629 martin luther king, shout out to big bro.
struggled with this section the most out of all of them and ive watched the videos numerous times
6/7 THATS A WIN!!!
#feedback in the written explanation of correct AC B, it says "rappers can work along, they" instead of "alone"
can someone give me examples of how the critic would hypothetically provide "evidence against the professor’s premises"?
#help
this is the relatively rare instance in which the critic would say the professor's premises are incorrect (they do not work alone, or it is a formal process to learn how to rap). it's usually not going to be the right answer for these questions.
Great question. I believe they would attack the premises directly, just like the person above said. They would attack the premise that they work alone and also the premise that learning rap is not as formal as learning an instrument, lastly the premise that says rappers do not take other musicians into account when creating their music.
If it helps anyone, I went into this question with my strategy for point-of-disagreement questions. I first summarized the professor's argument and then the critics. It is not explicitly stated but the music critic disagrees with the professor's conclusion that rap music is individualistic and non-traditional. From using this strategy, I knew that the method of reasoning had to do with disagreeing or "challenging" the conclusion.
I can see why E is tempting because the critic touches on both aspects mentioned in the conclusion, but the critic mainly attacks the conclusion by showing that there are certain things he forgot to consider when forming his conclusion.
#help
I still dont get how E is wrong. I still read the critic challenging the professor's 2 points
(non traditional and individualistic.)
The critic challenges the non traditional part by stating that rap has in of itself tradition
(which is weak but still a challenge).
The critic challenges the individualistic point by stating that rap music is not individualistic since it conforms to the public's preferences. (also weak but still a challenge)
plse help.
It states the claims set by the professor, not the conclusion itself. The conclusion being non traditional and individualistic. Essentially, stating the critic does not challenge the conclusion itself, just the premises. I think you have just confused premise for the conclusion because of the grammar being tricky. Hope this helps.
I am getting all of these wrong. Between NA and MR I might die.
I am getting these right, but feel like I could easily get them wrong. This felt like a 4 star. I had it narrowed down to A and B. Decided on B after 4 minutes. Ended up deciding against A, because the critic actually attacks damn near everything about the argument. So it stating only 1 premise did not seem good enough.