Self-paced
Philosopher: Philosophers usually treat emotions as nonrational. ███ ███████ ██ ███ ████████████ ██ ████ █████ ████ ███ ███████ ████████ █████ ███ ███████ ██ ██████ ████████ ███████████ ██ ████████ ███ █████ ██ ███ ██ █████ ██ ████████ ████ ████ ████ ███████ █████ ██ █████ ████████████████████████ █████ ████ ███ ██ ███ █████ ███ ████████ █████ ██ ██ ████████ ███ ██████████ ████ ███ ███ ███ ███████ ████ ████████
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The philosopher argues that, contrary to others in his field, emotion is not nonrational. It only seems that way because language cannot convey emotion in its entirety. The words we use to describe certain feelings, such as joy, calm, etc., are very general. For example, there is language to describe how one feeling of “joy” differs from someone else’s experience of the same emotion.
Identify Argument Part
It is an example that the argument uses to support a claim (that the words we use to describe certain emotions are general) that supports the main conclusion.
22.
Which one of the following ████ ██████████ █████████ ███ ████ ██████ ██ ███ █████████████ ████████ ██ ███ ███████████ ████ █████ ██ ██ ████████ ███ ██████████ ████ ███ ███ ███ ███████ ████ ████████
a
It is an ███████ ██ ███ ██████████ ████ ███ ████████ █████ ██ ████████
The statement is an example, but it is not the phenomenon that the argument seeks to explain. The argument seeks to explain why emotions are perceived as nonrational, not the lack of language itself.
b
It is the ████ ██████████ ██ ███ █████████
It is not the main conclusion of the argument. This is an example that supports the main conclusion in the second sentence.
c
It is a ████████ ████████ ████████████ █ ███████ ██████ ███████ ██████████ ██████████ ███ ███████████
The statement illustrates the general claim that language is inadequate for describing emotions in detail. This supports the conclusion that emotions are perceived as nonrational because of this inadequacy.
d
It is a ██████████ ██ ███ ████ ████ ███ ████████ █████ ██ ███████
This is not a concession to the argument the author seeks to refute. This example supports the author’s hypothesis that refutes the other philosophers’ argument.
e
It is the ███████████ ████████ ███ ███ ██████████ ███ ████████ █████ ██ ████████
This is not an explanation. The explanation is the author’s main conclusion.