LRB, Point at issue, Page 478

[reop6780]

One of the incorrect answers suggested for "point at issue" is "ethical versus factual situations."

Hence, for the ethical stimuli, factual answers must be incorrect automatically.

And, this applies to the question on pg 478 between Shanna and Jorge.

According to the explanation, answer C and E are simply excluded since they are "factual" while the stimuli is "ethical."

My problem is that I cannot draw distinction easily between factual and ethical answers.

It appears to be a huge advantage to recognize what is factual or ethical to reduce time on the test.

Is there more specific criteria or easier way to distinguish factual and ethical answers?

Finally, in the pg 479, it states "will disagree, which is not necessarily the same as identifying the point at issue."

I thought they were the same "point at issue" problem.

The question stems varies with "disagree" or "issue."

Was I supposed to approach these problems differently?

[Dave Killoran]

Hi Hyun,

I think you probably have a better ability to do this than you think In other words, the process of distinguishing between factual and ethical answers sounds more difficult in theory than it is in practice. Let's begin by addressing that point first, using Jorge and Shanna.

Let's start with (C) and (E). Take a look at the language used in those two answers—. Do you see how they are stated flatly, in a declarative fashion? "Valuable paintings by well-known artists are seldom intentionally damaged..." and "It is legally permissible..." (italics added). These statements have an element of definitive truth to them, something that could be checked.

You may also note that in this question, (C) and (E) do not mention morals or ethics, whereas (A), (B), and (D) do mention those words. This doesn't happen in every question, but it is a clue.

Another clue is to look at the wording of (A), (B), and (D). It's different, and presented in more of a question or hypothetical manner than the flat factual assertions in (C) and (E).
Compare those to an answer like (A), which proceeds in rather a different fashion: "Anyone who owns a portrait presenting his or her father in an unflattering light would for that reason alone be ethically justified in destroying it." Is that something that is certain (factual)? It's not.

In a sense, you can ask yourself whether it's a point people would debate about with an uncertain answer (ethics) or whether it could be solved by looking it up on Google (it's a fact then).

As far as disagreements versus points at issue, both are about disagreements. the point at issue is the main point they are debating, as opposed to simply something they would disagree about. For example, you can have an argument with someone and disagree about several things, but you could both agree that some of those disagreements are minor, and that some of them are much more important. when a stem discusses the point at issue, they want the main disagreement (that's the "issue" part--what the central issue is what they mean). If the question stem simply references "a disagreement," then anything they disagree about will work.

Please let me know if that helps. Thanks!

[Jason Schultz]

Hi reop,

To build on Dave's answer, another way of looking at the difference is to imagine giving the statement as advice to a younger relative. You wouldn't simply recite a fact to them - you'd suggest how they should act. Ethical statements are meant to inform decisions. The decision whether to keep the money you find in a lost wallet, to name a simple example.

[reop6780]

I had AH-HA moment

Thank you so much!