Q25 - Lutsina: Because futuristic science fiction does not n

[tommywallach]

PT 65, S4, Q25 (Identify the Disagreement)

(C) is correct.

This is an Identify the Disagreement question, and as such, we have to focus on the overlap between the two speakers in order to discover where they disagree. In this case, we are given two full arguments, complete with conclusions and supporting premises. We begin with our sci-fi geek:

Lutsina: FSF doesn’t have to represent current social realities + it can show new social arrangements = FSF does social criticism better than conventional fiction.

Priscilla: FSF shows new tech better than new social arrangements + the best social criticism comes from showing current social realities = conventional fiction does social criticism better than FSF.

Let’s look at the overlap first. Both agree that FSF doesn’t have to represent current social realities, and both are discussing fiction’s capability to provide social criticism. Lutsina and Priscilla disagree most directly in their conclusions over which genre of fiction provides the best social criticism.

(A) This is a very tempting answer choice. At first glance, it does seem like Lutsina is saying that FSF writers envisage new social arrangements, while Priscilla argues that they do not. However, Lutsina says only that FSF writers "can" envisage new social arrangements, while Priscilla says only that FSF writers don’t envisage new social arrangements as "skillfully" as they envisage new technologies. Neither author claims that FSF writers definitively have or have not succeeded in envisaging convincing, radically new social arrangements.

(B) Skill is never really discussed in the passage, except when Priscilla says that FSF writers are more skillful in describing technology than new social arrangements. This does not imply she thinks FSF writers have no skill; on the contrary, the implication is that they have some specific skills, rather than others.

(C) This answer choice directly relates to the two genres of fiction and their possible potential as vehicles for social criticism.

(D) While Priscilla mentions this dichotomy (envisaging new technologies versus portraying new social arrangements), Lutsina never does. We do not know her opinion on the value of envisaging new technology versus envisaging new social arrangements.

(E) Both Priscilla and Lutsina argue that it could very well be effective to critique current social arrangements by comparing them to radically different ones. The issue is whether or not FSF writers are actually able to accomplish this goal. Priscilla argues that they are incapable of it, not that it wouldn’t be useful if they could.