#3 - Global Reference, Must Be True, Purpose/Function

[Administrator]

Please post below with any questions!

[brcibake]

I thought the answer was E. I did not think B was a strong answer but was unsure about this question because I did not know what the primary purpose is so I could not prephrase? Anyway to fix this problem? Also, how is the answer B?
Thank you!

[Adam Tyson]

To prephrase a purpose or function question, brcibake, start by asking yourself why the author wrote the passage. Was it to inform us? To influence us in some way? To sound a warning, or to express optimism about something? To praise, or to criticize, or to question?

This passage seems to have been written with the purpose of informing us, the readers, about Rawls and his theory of justice. Start your prephrase just there - to inform. That by itself is enough to eliminate answers D and E - there is no debate or argument here, just information.

Now dig deeper into the remaining answers. Did we get any information about a theory being abandoned? Not at all. The author seems to dismiss the utilitarian approach, but tells us nothing about it being generally abandoned, and in any event that wouldn't be the main point of the passage but just an introductory idea. Answer A has to go!

Did we learn anything about whether Rawls' theory is celebrated to any degree? Nope, nothing. Our author seems enamored of the theory, but there's no indication that anyone else feels the same way. Answer C is toast - toss it away.

This leaves only answer B, so it must be the correct answer, but if you aren't satisfied with that, seek out some support for it in the passage. Seek, and ye shall find! Our author tells us that the theory is "ingenious" and "clever". That's enough for me to be comfy with the use of "novel" in this last remaining contender answer. I hope it's enough for you, too!

[mjb514]

I had a hard time picking answer choice B because I did not believe the theory was addressing a specific problem. The passage seems to be comparing the theory of justice to utilitaranism. What problem is there?

[Adam Tyson]

The problem is laid out at the beginning of the passage, mjb514, around lines 16-19 - without a utilitarian approach (which has its own problems), how are we to determine what justice requires? It's framed as a question, but that is another way of expressing a problem. It's something we have to answer, to solve. Rawls' theory is trying to give us a better solution for determining what is just, reacting against the unacceptable implications of the utilitarian approach.

Problem solved, I hope? Good luck, keep at it!

[April30Gang]

Hello,

The novel way in this scenario is the theory of justice (I'm assuming). While it's novel, what problem is it addressing? Fairness? I saw the previous choice and having a hard time accepting the explanation because it seems fairness arrives because Rawls is trying to cover loopholes to justify his theory against utilitarianism.

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Hi April30

The novel way is the way in which Rawls addresses a theory of justice. Instead of looking at the results to determine if something is just, Rawls looks to the process of decision making. That is a novel change to the previous process utilitarianism used which focused on what would result in the best overall good. The problem with answer choice (A) is that we don't know that utilitarianism was abandoned. There's no support for that in the passage. Just because a new theory is developed doesn't mean that the old theories are abandoned.

Hope that helps

[confused_pringle]

I was stuck between B and D on this one. Although I didn't love D, I ended up eliminating B because of the word "novel". I could not find specific support in the passage for the author thinking Rawl's theory was novel. Is the author implying he thinks the theory is novel through the word ingenious? Or is there something else I'm missing here?

Thanks!

[katehos]

Hi confused_pringle!

The use of the word "ingenious" alongside other words like "clever" to describe Rawls's theory gives us enough proof to claim that Rawls's theory was "novel" - good work!

Additionally, if you take a closer look at (D), you might find there are good reasons to eliminate this answer choice. (D) describes the primary purpose as a "debate", which is not something that took place in this passage. The author did not outline advantages and disadvantages of this theory, rather, their purpose seems to be informing us of the theory's existence and meaning (with only a slight reference to something 'unfortunate' about the theory).

I hope this helps
Kate