Antonio: One can live a life of moderation by never deviating from the middle course. But then one loses the joy of spontaneity and misses the opportunities that come to those who are occasionally willing to take great chances, or to go too far.
Marla: But one who, in the interests of moderation, never risks going too far is actually failing to live a life of moderation: one must be moderate even in one’s moderation.
Antonio and Marla disagree over
(A) whether it is desirable for people occasionally to take great chances in life
(B) what a life of moderation requires of a person
(C) whether it is possible for a person to embrace other virtues along with moderation
(D) how often a person ought to deviate from the middle course in life
(E) whether it is desirable for people to be moderately spontaneous
A. Incorrect. While it may seem that both speakers value spontaneity, this choice misses the key distinction. Marla and Antonio are not aligned in how they define moderation—this is where their views diverge.
B. Correct. This captures the central disagreement. Antonio sees moderation as requiring restraint and a dull, predictable life, while Marla argues that true moderation actually involves occasionally taking bold risks—even stepping beyond the boundaries of moderation itself.
C. Incorrect. Neither speaker discusses appearance or fashion, and nothing in their statements addresses whether someone can be both moderate and well dressed. This claim goes beyond the scope of their views.
D. Incorrect. This option wrongly assumes the speakers are offering advice. In reality, both are explaining what they believe moderation consists of—not what people ought to do. Antonio may even believe a boring but moderate life is worthwhile.
E. Incorrect. Like D, this answer treats their comments as expressions of preference or value. But both are focused on defining the conditions of moderation, not weighing in on what is most desirable.
