PrepTest 147

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen (Principle)

Stimulus Summary:
Scholars - Shakespeare's portrayal of Richard III was based on propaganda and thus inaccurate
Rebuttal - That portrayal is interesting even if inaccurate, so the Scholars' argument is irrelevant to appreciating the work

Answer Anticipation:
While most Strengthen (Principle) questions end up having answers that connect the details in the premises to the judgment in the conclusion, this argument is heading in a different direction by concluding something about an opposing point—mainly, that it's irrelevant to appreciating the play. However, that's not based on what they said, but rather a new consideration that the author brings up. So the correct answer here should justify that consideration as a rebuttal.

So what is the author's justification? Shakespeare's character is interesting (aesthetically and morally), even if he's historically inaccurate. So the author is prioritizing "interesting" over "historically accurate." Let's find an answer that justifies that.

Answer Explanation:
While this answer doesn't fully justify the conclusion, it does divorce value from historical accuracy, which the argument does. Since this question stem asks us to find the answer that "most helps to justify" the argument, and this goes a long way towards justifying finding value in Richard III despite a lack of historical accuracy, we have our answer.

Key Takeaway:
Generally, Strengthen (Principle) questions will focus on justifying the judgment in the conclusion of the argument. However, when that judgment is an appraisal of an opposing point, it's much more likely than usual that the correct answer will justify the premises as a rebuttal to the initial point than the conclusion itself.

Incorrect. This answer runs counter to the author's conclusion that the historical inaccuracy doesn't undercut the value of the work.

Incorrect. The argument isn't that Shakespeare's importance puts him beyond all criticism, but rather that one specific criticism is irrelevant to appreciating the work. That doesn't even claim that the criticism is irrelevant, just irrelevant to one aspect of reading it.

Incorrect. First, there's no indication that Richard III was on the losing side and the propagandists on the winning side. Ignoring that, the argument isn't about the propaganda but rather whether the inaccuracies invalidate enjoyment of Shakespeare's work.

Incorrect. There's no accounting of Richard III's goodness, so this answer is out of scope. The argument also doesn't make a determination as to whether the inaccuracies should be corrected—she could believe that they should be, but that they don't detract from enjoyment of the play.