Question:

A TED talk (the acronym stands for Technology, Entertainment, and Design) is one of the routes to academic stardom that didn't exist a decade ago. (The 30th anniversary celebration aside, curators only began posting fame-making free online videos in 2006.) Although TED plays an inordinate role in setting the tone for how ideas are conveyed, not only because of the reach of its videos but also through spinoffs like regional "TEDx" events and the TED Radio Hour, one of the few places nonpolicy intellectuals get substantial on-air time, it's just one of a number of platforms that are changing the ecology of academic celebrity. These include similar ideas-in-nuggets conclaves, such as the Aspen Ideas Festival and PopTech, along with huge online courses and, yes, still, blogs. These new, or at least newish, forms are upending traditional hierarchies of academic visibility and helping to change which ideas gain purchase in the public discourse.

In a famous essay, "The Unbearable Ugliness of Volvos," first published in the early 90s, the literary scholar Stanley Fish wrote that "the flourishing of the lecture circuit has brought with it new sources of extra income ... [and] an ever-growing list of stages on which to showcase one's talents, and geometric increase in the availability of the commodities for which academics yearn, attention, applause, fame, and ultimately, adulation of a kind usually reserved for the icons of popular culture." Fish was Exhibit A among professors taking advantage of such trends, and his trailblazing as a lit-crit celebrity inspired the dapper, globe-trotting lit-theory operator Morris Zapp, a character in David Lodge's academic satire Small World. But the world Fish was describing, where no one could live-tweet the lectures, let alone post the talks for worldwide distribution, now seems sepia-toned. "If David Lodge's Morris Zapp were alive and kicking today," observes John Holbo, an associate professor of philosophy at the National University of Singapore, and blogger at Crooked Timber and the Valve, "he'd be giving a TED talk, not an MLA talk. Which is to say: He wouldn't be doing Theory. He probably wouldn't be in an English department."

Q73. Which of the following cannot be inferred from the passage?

Show Hint

Find the one option the passage's own words actually work against.
Updated On: Jul 16, 2026
  • TED is the future
  • Theory can no longer be counted on
  • Philosophy is best understood through demos
  • TED is irreplaceable
Show Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is D

Solution and Explanation

This is a "cannot be inferred" question, so you are hunting for the one option the passage actually contradicts or gives no support for, while the other three should each have some textual basis.

  1. A. TED is the future: the passage describes TED as playing an inordinate role in setting the tone for how ideas are conveyed and as part of a set of new platforms upending traditional hierarchies of academic visibility. This supports the idea that TED represents where academic communication is heading, so this can reasonably be inferred.
  2. B. Theory can no longer be counted on: Holbo's comment that a Fish-like academic today wouldn't be doing Theory and probably wouldn't be in an English department suggests that the kind of academic Theory Fish represented has lost its old standing in favour of TED-style communication. This is a fair inference from the passage.
  3. C. Philosophy is best understood through demos: John Holbo is introduced as an associate professor of philosophy, and his own point is precisely that ideas which used to live inside a lecture or an academic paper now travel through talks and demonstrations like TED. Coming from a philosopher commenting on how philosophy-adjacent ideas now spread, this option can be loosely inferred.
  4. D. TED is irreplaceable: the passage explicitly lists TED as just one of a number of platforms, alongside the Aspen Ideas Festival, PopTech, online courses and blogs, all serving a similar purpose. This directly works against the idea that TED cannot be replaced, since the author is describing a whole ecosystem of alternatives doing the same job.

Because the passage itself frames TED as one option among several interchangeable platforms, option D is the one claim the passage does not support and in fact leans against.

Let's summarize:

  • In "cannot be inferred" questions, check each option against explicit textual statements before deciding.
  • The passage's own words, just one of a number of platforms, rule out D directly.

The correct answer is option D, TED is irreplaceable.

Was this answer helpful?
0
0

Top SNAP General Engineering Questions

View More Questions

Top SNAP Reading Comprehension Questions

View More Questions