Q7 - Antonio: One can live a life

[dan]

7. (B)
Question Type: Analyze Argument Structure
This is a very tricky conversation. Antonio states that one can live a life of moderation by staying on the middle course. Maria disagrees. She says that one who stays on the middle course and never takes risks is actually not living a life of moderation (because never taking risks is not, by definition, moderate). Thus, the two disagree over what it means to live a life of moderation. Answer (B) expresses this. Notice that Maria never addresses the rest of Antonio’s argument about all the things that moderate people miss out on.

(A) is wrong because Maria never discusses whether it is desirable or undesirable to take chances. She only comments on what it means to live a life of moderation.
(C) is incorrect, because other virtues are out of scope.
(D) is incorrect. How often a person ought to deviate from the middle course is out of scope. Only Antonio discusses whether it is desirable to be spontaneous.
(E) is a half-scope answer. Only Antonio discusses whether it is desirable to be spontaneous.


#officialexplanation

[mrudula_2005]

Hmm, more on how (B) fits would be a huge help. To me, (B) correct because...

Marla believes a life of moderation requires a person to be "moderate even in one's moderation" whereas Antonio does not NECESSARILY believe that to be the case since "One can live a life of moderation by never deviating from the middle course." Then again, wouldn't that make (B) outside the scope of Antonio's argument? We don't know what Antonio's views are about what a life of moderation requires of a person. For example, his first sentence is not "One MUST life a life of moderation by never deviating from the middle course." just that "One CAN."

Essentially, how does Antonio have an opinion on (B) - it is never explicitly stated - or is it enough that we know that Marla does NOT require something of a person pursuing a life of moderation (and that is - to be moderate even in one's moderation as Marla would have)????

Thank you!

[noah]

I saw you post this elsewhere (you two-timer ), but here's my response:

I agree with you - we're not sure if Antonio means that the middle road is a requirement or one way to do it. But think of it this way. Antonio says you could do it by doing X. Maria then says, "no, you must do it with Y." Even if Antonio were to agree that Y is a possibility (i.e., he was not stating the middle road is a requirement), then they'd still disagree about what a life of moderation requires. Antonio does not think it requires deviating from the middle course, Maria does.

An analogy:

Tom: You can make great ice cream with skim milk.
Lila: No, you must use half-and-half to have great ice cream!

(B) They disagree about what is required to make great ice cream (Lila thinks that half-and-half is required, Tom does not).

Make sense? Now that I look over your post again, it sounds like I'm confirming your idea there.

[mrudula_2005]

oh, perfect! thank you for the confirmation (in both places )

[disguise_sky]

Could anyone explain what Marla means by saying "one must be moderate even in one's moderation"?
Sorry if this question seems stupid. English is not my native language and I am having some trouble with understanding every word in the stimulus.

[tommywallach]

Hey Disguise,

The idea is that if you were moderate in ALL things, that wouldn't actually be very moderate, because you're doing it ALL the time without any exceptions. In other words, one must be immoderate at times (For example, eating too much chocolate) to be considered a moderate person overall (one who doesn't do anything too extremely).

-t

[disguise_sky]

Thanks tommy! It is a very clear explanation.