Q19

[samuel.harris.10]

Hi, quickly eliminated (a) during the test because I thought that Marcuse believed advertising lead people to think they are UNsatisfied. Parsing through the passage, I'm still having a tough time finding where Marcuse indicates the opposite. Any pointers are appreciated. Thanks!

[logicfiend]

Hi samuel.harris.10, I'm no expert, but I also just took this test and I was stuck on this question. Aside from using process of elimination to get to (A), I think it is also testing the overall understanding of the Marcuse's ideas.

I think his views indicate that it's not that people are unsatisfied, it's that they THINK they're satisfied because the products fulfill their "false needs," which he believes are different than "real needs." Because these products are catering to these "false needs," people can't find genuine fulfillment, and they are on some level unsatisfied. The key part of this answer choice is that people "think" they are satisfied, when in reality Marcuse believe they aren't, not really. The whole point of advertising, according to Marcuse, is that it persuades people into thinking they are satisfied in order to keep buying products.

Most directly this claim is supported by lines 4-9, "Central to this type of critique are the writings of political theorist Herbert Marcuse, who maintained that modern people succumb to oppression by believing themselves satisfied in spite of their living in an objectively unsatisfying world." Hope this helps.

[ohthatpatrick]

Brilliant explanation. Let us know if anyone wants a different take on it.

(B) Unsupported Comparison - "modern vs. earlier"?

(C) Extreme - "impossible" " any"

(D) Out of Scope - "totalitarian regimes"?

(E) Contradicted - Marcuse does NOT think they become 'real needs'

[benjamin.w.richmond]

I'm having trouble eliminating answer choice C

"It is impossible to draw any meaningful distinction between real and false psychological needs in modern society"

The author seems to attribute this view to Marcuse as the author states "If Marcusians are right, we cannot, with any assurance, separate our real needs from the alleged false needs we feel as a result of the manipulation of advertisers"

Albeit he does not state Marcusians say it is "impossible" but "cannot, with any assurance" seemed too close for me to call this a meaningful distinction

I know I'm missing something here, help me out!

[ohthatpatrick]

I think there is a meaningful enough distinction between "it's impossible to do X" and "we can't, with any assurance, do X".

If I asked you, "you think you have enough gas in your car to get us to Vegas?"

These two responses mean very different things:
"It would be impossible to get to Vegas with the gas in my car"
vs.
"We cannot, with any assurance, get to Vegas with the gas in my car"

You only package in that "with any assurance" qualifier when you're opening the door for an unlikely possibility.

And if you're acknowledging something is possible, it's too extreme to accuse you of having said "it's impossible".

=======

But luckily there IS another distinction that I'm glad you're prompting me to see / explain.

The quote you supplied in your post is something the AUTHOR is saying, not a claim he attributes to Marcuse.

Marcuse says that the pervasive world of advertising influences our sense of needs.

The author says, if Marcuse is correct about the influence of ads on our sense of needs, then how the heck could we ever be clear-headed enough to distinguish between real and false needs at this point?

That 2nd idea is the author's. The author takes it to be an absurd consequence of adopting the 1st idea, which was set forth by Marcuse.

But (C) is just giving us the 2nd idea, which belongs to our author.
The author is saying "If what Marcuse says is true, then it would allow me to logically infer MY CLAIM
Einstein said

[andrewgong01]

I am still somewhat confused with this passage because on Line 22-25 in P2 when Marcuse's views are being summarized, it states that "the implicit promises of advertisements are NEVER really fulfilled".

With that in mind, that seems to go against "A" because people are not fulfilled. I guess my main confusion then is whose view's are we talking about in the liens I cited and P2 in general because I thought P2 was mainly Marcuse's view where Marcuse is lambasting advertisements for creating some false need and this false need is never fulfilled, leading to the "hegemony" described in P1.