A question about two texts tests whether you can use one author’s view to judge another’s claim. Read the question for who answers whom, then sum up each author’s claim and reason in a few words. Would the responding author reject the claim, accept it with a limit, or apply it to a new case? The reason decides, because even a choice that gets the author’s view right can give a reason the author never offers.
Hints
- Hint 1
Find Mendel’s reasons for calling the coffeehouses egalitarian, especially what she says about price and membership. Ask how those reasons support equal participation.
- Hint 2
Look in Shore’s records for what patrons had to pay to join discussions. Compare those charges with the price Mendel describes.
- Hint 3
What distinction does Shore’s last sentence make between being technically open to everyone and being able to participate? Use that distinction to judge Mendel’s claim.
Step-by-step
Find the claim, then Shore’s reason
Step 1Find Mendel’s reason
Read the question’s direction first: Shore is answering Mendel’s claim that coffeehouses were egalitarian, meaning people across social classes could take part on equal terms. What is Mendel’s reason? She says laborers could sit beside aristocrats because coffee was cheap and there was an absence of formal membership requirements. Her claim rests on low prices and no membership barrier.
- Step 2
Find the added costs
Shore’s records show entrance fees during peak hours and required purchases of costly pamphlets before joining discussions. What would a newcomer have to pay beyond the cup of coffee? These charges made joining a debate cost more than Mendel’s account suggests, and the pamphlet requirement has no stated peak-hour limit. The coffee price wasn't the full cost of taking part.
- Step 3
See why openness isn't enough
Does being technically open to all make a space egalitarian in practice? Shore says the coffeehouses effectively filtered out most of the city’s working poor, so people could lack the money to participate even without a membership rule. He rejects Mendel’s claim. Her evidence doesn't show genuine equality, so he isn't accepting her claim with a small limit. He can agree that the doors were open while questioning whether everyone could take part equally.
- Step 4
Match Shore’s reason and its strength
Which choice gives that view for Shore’s own reason? The wording overlooks economic barriers points to the fees and required purchases, while many lower-income citizens fits what he found about most of the working poor. That keeps the response about the cost of participation, without claiming that every poor resident was kept out. Choice C.