Question

Read the following discussion.

RIKU:
Big Brother in 1984 obviously isn't real. The Inner Party just
needs a figurehead that makes the people in the Outer
Party feel as if they're being watched by a real person and
not by a faceless organization.
VICTOR:
I agree. Winston spends the first part of the book doing his
normal everyday job in the Ministry of Truth, which is
rewriting history and throwing unwanted bits down a
"memory hole." That sort of proves that everything the
Party shows the common people is a lie.
EDGAR:
I don't see why it's obvious that Big Brother doesn't exist
though. Most dictatorships are run by a single person, so
there's no reason the dictatorship in 1984 is any different.
In fact, if it weren't, the members of the Inner Party would
probably fight one another for power, and the system
would break down.
MARIA:
Interesting. So the stability of the dictatorship in 1984 is
actually evidence of a single dictator.
Which student is most clearly assessing a discussion partner's claim?

Answer 1

Edgar is assessing a discussion partner's claim by challenging the notion that Big Brother is not real and suggesting that historical precedent supports the stability of dictatorships led by single leaders.

Step-by-step explanation:

Among the students, Edgar is most clearly assessing a discussion partner's claim. Edgar challenges Riku's assertion by pointing out the historical prevalence of dictatorships led by a single person, which implies the possibility of Big Brother being real in the society depicted in 1984.

Further, he posits that a real figure at the helm would prevent power struggles within the Inner Party, arguing that such unity under a single leader is evidence of the stability of the dictatorship. This approach of analyzing the claim and providing a counterargument is a clear assessment of the original statement made by Riku.