Q10 - The enthusiastic acceptance of ascetic

[itzakadoozie412]

I don't know why choice (B) is correct. What sample is the sample that theyre referring to that is likely to be unrepresentative? If it's the monastic authors, is it because theyre unrepresentative of authors in general during this time period?

My first choice on this was (C).

[giladedelman]

Thanks for the question!

So, the argument concludes that medieval societies were less concerned with money than contemporary Western cultures. But that claim is based on the writings of ascetic monks! Is that really the best way to gauge the values of an entire society?

Imagine if I said, based on the journals of NBA players from the 50s, American society back then was way more into basketball than it is now. You would point out that, duh, I'm relying on a pretty unrepresentative sample! What about people (almost everyone) who weren't in the NBA?

That's what's happening here. The argument bases its claim on a sample that's clearly biased towards an ascetic lifestyle. That's why (B) is correct. It's not that the monks aren't representative of writers, but rather that they're not representative of their society as a whole.

(A) is incorrect because there's nothing imprecise about "ascetic."

(C) is incorrect because there are no standards being applied here. The argument simply compares two societies to each other.

(D) is just ... come on.

(E) is out because there's only one premise, for starters.

Does that answer your question?

[itzakadoozie412]

Yes, I understand the question. The word 'ascetic' was throwing me off!

[Dtodaizzle]

What threw this question off for me is the "enthusiastic acceptance." Why can't we treat this description as the author's personal opinion?

On the reading passages, I have encountered questions that ask you to infer an author's opinion on a stance. Often times, strong descriptive languages would connote the author's opinion.