helpmegmat
MartyMurray
helpmegmat
I selected A as my answer choice but upon reevaluation, I landed on the conclusion that the fact that "The experience of having smiles regularly induced by means of artificial stimulation would not cause people to have negative perceptions of things around them." does not mean that it would cause them to have positive perceptions of things. That there could be something between a positive and negative perception. Is my reasoning correct?
Hi
helpmegmat.
I'm curious about something.
What does the following mean to you?
in whom a momentary smile was induced by means of artificial stimulation
Hi Marty,
I took that to mean a smile that results from external intervention or artificial means.
OK, perfect. I wanted to make sure the sentence was clear enough.
Now, let's talk about choice (A).
The issue is not that there is something between positive and negative perception. After all, if it were the case that an aspect of regulary doing what the author suggests would cause people to have negative perceptions, then the argument would not work. The author is indeed assuming that taking the suggested course of action will not cause people to have negative perceptions.
At the same time, there is still a reason why (A) is not correct. Here's what it is.
The conclusion is that people can make their impressions more positive by "smiling regularly."
"Smiling regularly" is not creating "a smile that results from external intervention or artificial means." It involves actively smiling in a natural way.
So, the author doesn't have to assume anything about the effects of "the experience of having smiles regularly induced by means of artificial stimulation" because the conclusion is not about "smiles regularly induced by means of artificial stimulation." The conclusion is about actively "smiliing regularly."
The conclusion is supported by information about smiles induced by means of artificial stimulation, but the conclusion itself is not about that.
So, (A) is not necessary for the argument to work.