Publisher: In the age of the internet, the writings of amateurs and

Question

Publisher: In the age of the internet, the writings of amateurs and hobbyists have become more popular and widespread than ever before. However, the cultural reach of amateur writers will always be limited compared to that of professional writers because amateurs lack the infrastructure and maturity needed to produce culture-defining works.

Sociologist: I once shared this opinion regarding the potential of amateur writing. However, I realized that my research into this phenomenon could not have been produced without the amateur writers and hobbyists who allowed me to interview them and explained the intricacies of online fiction to me.

The sociologist’s response to the publisher is flawed for which of the following reasons?

A. The sociologist does not address the argument made by the publisher that amateur writers lack the infrastructure and maturity needed to produce culture-defining works.
B. The sociologist refused to interview any professional writers for his research.
C. The sociologist’s response is invalid because he has changed his mind about the potential of amateur writing.
D. The sociologist’s opinion about the potential of amateur writers opposes that of the publisher.
E. The sociologist does not discuss the popularity of the writings of amateurs and hobbyists.

This is a  CR Butler Question

Check the links to other Butler Projects:
 
  Data Sufficiency Butler  
  Problem Solving Butler  
  Sentence Correction Butler  
  Reading Comprehension Butler  
  Integrated Reasoning Butler

AbhishekP220108 · Answer

The core problem here is that these two people are having two completely different conversations. They are talking past each other.

Think of it this way: 
Imagine the Publisher is a film critic. He says,  "You know, TikTok creators are popular, but they will never win an Oscar because they lack the budget, the cameras, and the scriptwriting maturity to make a cinema masterpiece."

Then the Sociologist jumps in and says,  "I disagree! I used to think that too, but then I interviewed a bunch of TikTok creators for my PhD thesis, and they were super helpful in explaining how the algorithm works. I couldn't have written my thesis without them!"

Do you see the disconnect?
 
  The Publisher  is talking about  Artistic Quality  (creating "culture-defining works"). 
  The Sociologist  is talking about  Utility  (being useful research subjects).

Just because the amateur writers were helpful to the Sociologist's research doesn't prove they are capable of writing the next  Great Gatsby . The Sociologist completely ignored the Publisher's actual point about "infrastructure and maturity."

Now let's look at the answer choices with that in mind: 
 
  (A)  says the Sociologist failed to address the point about "infrastructure and maturity." This is exactly right. He sidestepped the real argument to talk about his own research instead.  This is the flaw.  
  (B)  complains he didn't interview professionals. That doesn't matter. Who he interviewed isn't the issue; his logic is the issue. 
  (C)  says he's invalid because he "changed his mind." That's not a flaw! It's actually good to change your mind if you find new evidence. The problem is that his "evidence" was irrelevant. 
  (D)  says he "opposes" the publisher. Disagreeing isn't a flaw. You are allowed to disagree; you just have to give a good reason for it. 
  (E)  says he didn't discuss "popularity." The Publisher already admitted they were popular, so there was no need to bring that up again.

So,  (A)  is the winner because it points out that the Sociologist brought a "they are helpful" argument to a "they are not artistic" fight.

aditya1818 · Answer

It was difficult to find the heart of the argument altogether so I just concentrated on what the individuals said and what they implied and so heart of the implied idea of each individual was calibrated by me.

A. The sociologist does not address the argument made by the publisher that amateur writers lack the infrastructure and maturity needed to produce culture-defining works. -  Correct: Holding on to this as this is correct. 
B. The sociologist refused to interview any professional writers for his research.-  Incorrect: Anybody can reason this out whosoever reads the above stimuli 
C. The sociologist’s response is invalid because he has changed his mind about the potential of amateur writing.- Incorrect : I did not find this anywhere or any cues specifying this his argument. 
D. The sociologist’s opinion about the potential of amateur writers opposes that of the publisher.-  Incorrect: Again I did not find any cues or implication stating this. 
E. The sociologist does not discuss the popularity of the writings of amateurs and hobbyists.-  Incorrect: Even if they did this, how will this effect the argument of the Publisher ?

Dereno · Answer

The question is about a discussion between a publisher and sociologist. Let’s look into their views, their mutual opinions - where they agree and areas of contention - where they disagree.

Publisher  :

The publisher mentions because of the internet - the amateur writers are gaining traction among the general audience. This kind of limelight was not enjoyed by the professional authors, during their days.

The publisher goes on to pinpoint the amateur writers  have limited cultural reach  compared to the professional authors. The reason for this limitations are : Maturity & Infrastructure to produce culture defining works.

Sociologist  :

The sociologist begins saying “  I once shared this view  “ - which means sociologists earlier view reverberated with the views the publisher currently holds. This also throws light that, the view of sociologists has undergone a paradigm shift.

However, (shift from earlier view) - sociologist research on this topic has been facilitated by the interviews of amateur writers and hobbyists. They allowed the sociologist to interview them, shared their experiences on the intricacies of online writing.

We need to find the flaw:

A. The sociologist does not address the argument made by the publisher that amateur writers lack the infrastructure and maturity needed to produce culture-defining works.

Rather than countering the view of the publisher, the sociologist has taken a different view. This paradigm shift is a classical example of  Red herring ( Change of Subject) , which the politicians all over the world are well versed. The diversion from lack of infrastructure and maturity is not addressed, rather the sociologist explains his personal experience with the online amateur writers and hobbyist. Hence, the flaw.

B. The sociologist refused to interview any professional writers for his research.

Since, he interviews online amateur writers and hobbyists, doesn’t mean he refused interviewing professional. More over, interviewing professional is not the point around which the debate was structured. Hence, Wrong.

C. The sociologist’s response is invalid because he has changed his mind about the potential of amateur writing.

The sociologist changed his mindset about amateur writers. That’s is not the flaw in the arguement. Opinion differs and within a topic , you may accept some and reject many. Hence, Wrong.

D. The sociologist’s opinion about the potential of amateur writers opposes that of the publisher.

Its the other way round, the publishers view was initially put forth. Which was countered by the sociologist later. Hence, Wrong.

E. The sociologist does not discuss the popularity of the writings of amateurs and hobbyists.

Both accept the popularity of the amateur writers and hobbyists, this is the only point where the views of both sociologists and publishers coincided. Hence, Wrong.

Option A

arushi118 · Answer

Sociologist does not talk about the "culture-defining" works of amateurs and hobbyists. Hence, A is correct.

ExpertsGlobal5 · Answer

Video Solution:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aM_OYg2g3Kk

Publisher: In the age of the internet, the writings of amateurs and

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Publisher: In the age of the internet, the writings of amateurs and

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards