Q19 - The postmodern view involves

[martintp]

I have no idea about this stimulus and why its flawed. Can someone please help me out?

[timmydoeslsat]

The argument begins by talking about what composes the postmodern view.

The argument concludes that WE REALLY DO inhabit a world of no universal truths.

If you really think about this stimulus from an abstract view, you can see it from this light:

The arguer is bringing up a view or school of thought, gives points about what that view involves and how it differs from another view, and how this view has essentially overtaken the old view, but then concludes THAT WE ACTUALLY LIVE in the world that is described by the theory.

How do we know that there will not be a Post-postmodern view of the world? Then the old view will be overtaken just like the modern view was! That would mean that we really did inhabit a world that is described by that one theory.

Also, who knows how many views are out there about the world? There could easily be theories that totally contradict the postmodern view. The author's conclusion is very matter of fact, "It follows that we inhabit a world full of irregular events, and in which there are no universal truths."

Does that conclusion REALLY follow from those premises? No!

We cannot go from ONE theory that has overtaken another theory, with a possibility of that theory being overtaken in the future, and CONCLUDING from this, that something IS ACTUALLY the case, just from a theory.

Other answer choices:

B) The word universal does not shift meanings in this stimulus. It is associated with truth and is describing a totality of the concept of truth.

C) There is no emotion in this argument.

D) The word order is not used ambiguously, which means that the word is not clear or is used in different (inconsistent) ways. Order is used in the same manner, where it means how the universe operates or is governed in a certain manner.

E) It is not a flaw in this case to not cite examples of those modern theories that postmodernism overtook. The arguer talked about the assumptions of modernism that postmodernism rejects. There is no need for the arguer to cite the specifics.

[maryadkins]

Nice explanation!

This is a flaw question, so first task is to ID the core, which is:

modern era theories are now seen as limited by their contexts and now there's a belief in the importance of irregularity and chaos

-->

world is is full of irregular events & there are no universal truths

The flaw is that just because beliefs have changed doesn't mean that reality has changed to match them. (A) gets at this.

As for the other answer choices, great job breaking them down timmydoeslsat!

[roflcoptersoisoi]

Premise 1: The grand theories of the modern era are now seen as limited by the social social and historical contexts in which they arise
Premise 2: The belief in order has been supplanted by a belief in the important of irregularity and chaos
Conclusion: The world in which we inhabit is now full of irregularities and devoid of any universal truths.

Flaw: Over extrapolates opinions, i.e., presumes that because people believe some of the principles of post modern theory to be true, that they are in fact true.

(A) Looks good
(B) The author doesn't equivocate as to the word "universal"
(C) No universal terms are used in the stimulus
(D) Same as (B)
(E) Descriptively accurate but not why it's wrong. It fails to cite a lot of things.