<p>are you sure?</p>
<p>The author didn’t really talk about the philosophy that much.</p>
<p>I thought I only missed a couple but now i think I missed like 8 
boo</p>
<p>Yeah, it had a paragraph that explained her political philosophy and the conclusion paragraph spoke directly about the author’s tendency toward baker because of their shared political beliefs.</p>
<p>Political philosophy is definitely right. I had lots of time and I went back and tried to find things that actually were about her personality and there was little. She’s introduced, the quote was about political philosophy, then the second paragraph was about politics, then the biographer talked about herself and biography itself, and then at the end she went back to political similarities as the reason she initially studied Ella Baker.</p>
<p>But wasn’t there one paragraph about Baker’s personality too?</p>
<p>For the Fleece passage, were the lines a taunting or a parody.</p>
<p>How did you know that speaking through his navel was a taunting? I thought he was more making a scene and joking/mocking like a parody.</p>
<p>I don’t think it’s alternative approach. What was the established approach, to begin with? The opposite of “radical”?</p>
<p>Well, it said now is the time to accept radical thought or something. the now implied there was a different system of thought</p>
<p>Also, the question for the Fleece passage about the ideas was the answer:</p>
<p>Instinctual or conscious?</p>
<p>Fleece was saying that Ideas come from within, and you are either born with them or without them (paraphrase), therefore they are instincutal.</p>
<p>It doesn’t matter if there was one paragraph on her personality. The “primary” focus of the passage was on political philosophy.</p>
<p>I said alternative approach.</p>
<p>I put alternative approach as well.
By the way, to those who had CR experimental, was it the section with like ~12 vocab questions?</p>
<p>“the system under which we now exist has to be radically changed… It means facing a system that does not lend its self to your needs and devising means by which you change that system.”</p>
<p>I’m going with alternative still.</p>
<p>ideas are independent of human consciousness is what I put because he said it is there whether we want them or not</p>
<p>okay, here’s another passage to talk about… the political cartoon one. does anyone remember if ‘polemists criticized the cartoons’ because they were ‘advanced during turbulent times’? The only other answer I considered was that the cartoons were ‘deceptively innocent etc.’</p>
<p>which answer was the one with “hypothetical” in it?</p>
<p>I said alternative approach. She tried an unconventional definition of radical as part of her presentation and suggested others follow her way.</p>
<p>It was definitely political philosophy. There wasn’t nearly enough about her personality in that essay. But the entire fascination about how she supported certain rights and stuff point to political philosophy.</p>
<p>Did we settle between vehement vs caustic?
I personally put caustic because caustic is biting, almost corrosive whereas vehement is violent and passionate. I wouldn’t really say violent…</p>
<p>political cartoon= experimental</p>
<p>Does anyone remember the answer fallacious?</p>
<p>Fallacious was wrong.</p>
<p>I am still for caustic because it is “severely critical” - which is what he was being of burning coal. He wasn’t “emotional” because he was being rational in his condemnation. I wouldn’t be surprised if I were wrong, but that was my line of thought and still is.</p>
<p>For reference, this is the Ella Baker quote: “the system under which we now exist has to be radically changed… It means facing a system that does not lend its self to your needs and devising means by which you change that system.” I think this is much more of an “alternative approach” than a “hypothetical proposition.”</p>
<p>Caustic is like overly critical and sarcastic. It was critical of it, but in a pretty fair way(explained it’s point well). Vehement means to describe passionately and the author seemed very outspoken about his criticism for coal. I personally think vehement is the better answer</p>
<p>wait, does anyone remember the sc about the mathematician and philosopher who championed ---------, something about mystified and crap -------?</p>