Which of the following statements, if true, could be seen as not contradicting the arguments in the passage?
Started 2 months ago by Shashank in
Explanatory Answer
The question asks us to choose the option that does not contradict the arguments in the passage.
The author talks about patriotism in the context of ‘darker affiliations between people and place’, used by elites for ‘war preparation and ethnic cleansing’. Option 2 – patriotism, usually seen as a positive feeling, is presented by the author as a darker form of topophilia—does not contradict the arguments in the passage.
Option 1 states that ‘generally speaking, in a given culture, the ties of the people to their environment vary little in significance or intensity’. This contradicts the arguments in the passage in paragraph 1: ‘the emotive ties with the material environment vary greatly from person to person and in intensity, subtlety, and mode of expression.’
Option 3 states that ‘New Urbanism succeeded in those designs where architects collaborated with their clients’. This contradicts the statement in paragraph 3 that ‘although motivated by good intentions, such attempts to create places rich in meaning are perhaps bound to disappoint’.
Option 4 states that the most important, even fundamental, response to our environment is our tactile and olfactory response. The passage merely mentions tactile and olfactory response as ‘a third response to the environment’, not the most important or fundamental.
-
No one is replied to this question yet. Be first to reply!
