Question

Jorge: You won’t be able to write well about the rock music of the 1960s, since you were just an infant then. Rock music of the 1960s was created by and for people who were then in their teens and early twenties.

Ruth: Your reasoning is absurd. There are living writers who write well about ancient Roman culture, even though those writers are obviously not a part of ancient Roman culture. Why should my youth alone prevent me from writing well about the music of a period as recent as the 1960s?

Ruth responds to Jorge’s criticism by


(A) Challenging his claim that she was not in her teens or early twenties during the 1960s

(B) Clarifying a definition of popular culture that is left implicit in Jorge’s argument

(C) Using the example of classical culture in order to legitimize contemporary culture as an object worthy of serious consideration

(D) Offering an analogy to counter an unstated assumption of Jorge’s argument

(E) Casting doubt on her opponent’s qualification to make judgments about popular culture

Answer 1

Ruth counters Jorge by using an analogy, showing that personal experience is not a necessary condition to write about a historical time period effectively, as evidenced by writers who cover Roman culture without having lived in ancient times.

Step-by-step explanation:

Ruth responds to Jorge's criticism by offering an analogy to counter an unstated assumption of Jorge's argument. She effectively illustrates that one does not need to be contemporaneous with a historical period to write about it with authority and insight. Ruth uses the example of writers who successfully write about Roman culture despite not having lived in ancient times to challenge the idea that one must have been a part of the 1960s to write accurately about its rock music. This demonstrates that historical and cultural understanding transcends one's personal experience of the time period in question.