Lucien: Public housing advocates claim that the many homeless people in this city are proof that there is insufficien...
hatemzFebruary 17, 2020
What makes C the incorrect answer?
Doesn't Maria presenting evidence (the data that shows may people who are homeless actually do hold jobs" that calls into question his motives (there is enough housing but people for adopting the view he holds (the idea that people who are homeless do not have the ability or willingness to work)?
Is it because this answer choice uses the word motives?
Reply
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
Answer (B) is correct because it identifies what part of Lucien's argument Maria is attacking. In the very last sentence of his argument, Lucien states that "homelessness can, therefore, only be caused by people's inability or unwillingness to pay the rent." Maria attacks this statement by telling him that a significant percentage of homeless people in the city actually have regular jobs. This challenges a presumption of his argument.
Answer (C) is incorrect because, as you identified, these arguments are not about motive but are just about the ideas being presented. Generally, motive will not be involved unless the speaker has something personally to gain from the proposition. Here, Lucien is not gaining anything, so he has no motive in his statements.
A motive argument would look more like: There's a proposed low income building that would be built right in front of Lucien's apartment, blocking his view. So, he claims the homelessness crisis it's not about a lack of housing but rather about homeless people not having jobs. Then, Maria points out that he just doesn't want his view to be blocked. That would be her attacking his motive.
