Hi,
I need help with Passage 2 in Test 11 of the EK 101 Passages Workbook.
I struggled with this passage a little bit, I was very unsure if the author was in favour of the hypotheses he explains in the 5th paragraph, it seems all very neutral to me. While reading, I realized he is against the "Freudian" and "Neo-Freudian" POVs about stuttering (psychological or emotional disturbance POV) because he mentions "Unfortunately...the psychological profession has deemed stuttering abnormal", but it was never super clear to me if he actually supported the other side (physiological or neurological anomaly POV). I did not just want to assume that just because he dislikes one side, he immediately favours the other. I think I was also confused because at the end of the passage the author states "despite differing opinions"
Could someone explain where in the passage is a clue where it shows him favouring this other extreme?
I see now in the questions how I could've eliminated wrong answers, but I want to feel less confused about his POV.
Thank you,
Isabel