Last visit was: 23 May 2024, 04:48 It is currently 23 May 2024, 04:48
Toolkit
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

# Novelists cannot become great as long as they remain in academia

SORT BY:
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Current Student
Joined: 31 Jul 2017
Status:He came. He saw. He conquered. -- Going to Business School -- Corruptus in Extremis
Posts: 1732
Own Kudos [?]: 5783 [13]
Given Kudos: 3080
Location: United States (MA)
Concentration: Finance, Economics
Director
Joined: 29 Oct 2015
Posts: 746
Own Kudos [?]: 333 [3]
Given Kudos: 483
Senior Manager
Joined: 17 Aug 2018
Posts: 349
Own Kudos [?]: 313 [1]
Given Kudos: 254
Location: United States
WE:General Management (Other)
Director
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
Posts: 669
Own Kudos [?]: 41 [0]
Given Kudos: 26
Re: Novelists cannot become great as long as they remain in academia [#permalink]
Understanding the argument - ­
Novelists cannot become great as long as they remain in academia. - Conclusion.
Powers of observation and analysis, which schools successfully hone, are useful to the novelist, but an intuitive grasp of the emotions of everyday life can be obtained only by the kind of immersion in everyday life that is precluded by being an academic. - Supporting premise. Basically, it says that while academia provides the power of observation and analysis, it doesn't provide an intuitive grasp.

Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?

We need to find a missing premise or a minimum condition. We need to connect that "Novelists cannot become great as long as they remain in academia" with the premise that "while academia provides the power of observation and analysis, it doesn't provide an intuitive grasp." The gap is that an "intuitive grasp is necessary for novelists to become great."

(A) Novelists require some impartiality to get an intuitive grasp of the emotions of everyday life - Distortion.

(B) No great novelist lacks powers of observation and analysis - But that's not something that we need. We need an intuitive grasp. Out of scope.

(C) Participation in life, interspersed with impartial observation of life, makes novelists great - Which makes both the necessary conditions; thus, they can still be great while in academia. At best, it is a weakener.

(D) Novelists cannot be great without an intuitive grasp of the emotions of everyday life - Yes. It bridges the gap.

(E) Knowledge of the emotions of everyday life cannot be acquired by merely observing and analyzing life - Yes, the argument, in a way, already said this. See the ONLY way to get an intuitive grasp is by the kind of immersion in everyday life. At best, it's a strengthener. If we negate it, "Knowledge of the emotions of everyday life can be acquired by merely observing and analyzing life," which basically challenges the premise which says, "The ONLY way to get an intuitive grasp is by the kind of immersion in everyday life." Not only that, even if we knew that there is another way to get an intuitive grasp, we still need to tie it as a minimum condition to become a great novelist.
Re: Novelists cannot become great as long as they remain in academia [#permalink]
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6936 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts
CR Forum Moderator
832 posts