Solution
To solve this question,we need to find what Jane Jacobs specifically said about creative cities and understand her logic.
From passage: "I once asked the great urbanist Jane Jacobs what makes some places more creative than others. She said, essentially, that the question was an easy one. All cities, she said, were filled with creative people; that's our default state as people. But some cities had more than their shares of leaders, people and institutions that blocked out that creativity. She called them 'squelchers.'"
Key Logic: Jane Jacobs says all cities start with creative people -> Some cities have more "squelchers" (blockers) -> So more creative cities must have fewer blockers -> This means more creative cities have leaders who don't block creativity.
Option Analysis:
š“ Option 1 -> context-shift -> She never said cities "struggle to retain" creativity. She said all cities start with creative people naturally, so there's no struggle mentioned.
š“ Option 2 -> opposite-meaning -> This totally flips her point! She called the people who block creativity "squelchers" in a negative way. She's not saying creative cities should squelch people.
š¢ Option 3 -> correct inference -> Perfect logic! If some cities have more blockers (bad), then creative cities must have leaders who don't block creativity (good).
š“ Option 4 -> contradicts passage -> She clearly states "all cities were filled with creative people" as our "default state." So cities do start as creative hubs naturally.
The key insight: Jane Jacobs uses reverse logic. Instead of saying what makes cities creative, she explains what blocks creativity. More creative cities simply have fewer blockers.
More from this set:
Question 1
Question 3
Question 5