Charleton recently wrote a scathing attack on Winfreed's theory
: d( {, ~: X- ^9 h& Pabout the origin of portraiture. Charleton would never have felt - m0 k% G. [: X% {
personally threatened by Winfreed's theory unless he believed, + c+ f) x u5 |" }5 u o A; S
albeit subconsciously, that the theory was correct. Since Char-9 D6 _6 W3 R$ u7 v7 o
leton is a distinguished art historian, his attack can actually be
' p0 o6 ^+ P+ l# S! _4 ?* r4 v8 ataken as confirmation of Winfreed's theory.$ ?" u5 }# C% ?) b
+ P: S _5 I i$ \
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument
) A: U S- y* c9 ^+ ]& ~* _6 |! [% idepends?
( T3 ^4 U+ F; o# `
& M E5 u7 H7 Y Charleton would not have written a scathing attack on Win-* Q. d3 R; V1 B. P Y
freed's theory unless he had felt personally threatened by
- ^1 |6 I5 H: S8 q9 h2 z that theory.
# u+ ?2 @0 a* }3 g$ O; b Charleton would attack a theory he believed was correct only0 L4 w M: u8 _9 |1 J
if he did not consciously believe that it was correct. 5 x4 F" F$ M/ I6 H- K, L
Charleton would write about Winfreed's theory only if his4 l' `: {* k5 ~3 l6 f1 S& p3 E
explicit purpose was to attack that theory.
% p+ M% k' P( b- G0 j An attack on a theory about the origin of portraiture would
: x* I- s" O' x/ W serve as confirmation of that theory only if the attack were
' i) W3 Z' u" E" j7 M# Y7 R5 r% @ written by a distinguished art historian. * i9 S6 ]; G0 h, _( ~
Charleton's attack on Winfreed's theory would serve to con-/ K: M& K* w5 b) U: P
firm that theory only if the attack were scathing.
: o6 M; A. ?1 X: b$ j答案A |