Soru

Passage A
The mid-twentieth century witnessed the ascent of modernist urban planning, heavily influenced by Le Corbusier’s vision of the "Radiant City" and similar rationalist frameworks. Planners of this era sought to tame the supposedly chaotic industrial metropolis by strictly zoning areas for distinct, separated functions—living, working, and leisure—which were then connected by vast, high-speed arterial highways. The underlying assumption driving these monumental projects was that spatial order, extreme cleanliness, and geometric efficiency would translate directly into lasting social harmony. However, as decades of observation have shown, this top-down paradigm systematically dismantled the very fabric of urban vitality. By isolating civic functions and overwhelmingly prioritizing vehicular transit over the human, pedestrian scale, modernist planning effectively eradicated the dense, mixed-use neighborhoods that naturally incubate spontaneous social interaction, cultural exchange, and economic innovation. The legacy of these massive interventions is frequently a landscape characterized by sterility and social alienation; vibrant, organic communities were abruptly replaced by monolithic housing projects and desolate concrete plazas. These newly built environments failed profoundly because they did not account for the complex, unpredictable, and messy ways in which human beings actually inhabit and utilize shared space. True urbanity cannot be cleanly engineered through abstract zoning maps and master plans; rather, it emerges organically from the complex, unscripted friction of diverse populations freely sharing integrated, multi-purpose environments.

Passage B
In recent years, contemporary urban design has become increasingly captivated by the concept of the "15-minute city," a theoretical model proposing that all essential daily needs—work, education, retail, healthcare, and recreation—should be easily accessible within a short walk or bicycle ride from one's front door. Widely lauded as a long-overdue triumph of sustainability, environmentalism, and localism, this framework explicitly seeks to undo the massive ecological and social damage caused by decades of car-centric suburban sprawl. Yet, despite its highly localized, intimately community-focused rhetoric, the 15-minute city risks repeating the most fundamental philosophical error of its mid-century modernist predecessors: the arrogant belief that central planners can algorithmically dictate and perfectly optimize the daily flow of human activity. By attempting to compartmentalize the massive metropolis into a neatly organized series of self-sufficient, hyper-local pods, this contemporary model threatens to dilute the broader cross-pollination that truly defines vibrant metropolitan life. A major city’s greatest strength lies in its macro-scale diversity—the sheer necessity of citizens traveling well beyond their immediate, comfortable enclaves to encounter unfamiliar cultures, highly specialized industries, and serendipitous, unplanned opportunities. When urban environments are heavily over-curated into predictable, localized bubbles in the name of ultimate convenience and reduced carbon footprints, they lose the dynamic friction that drives continuous cultural evolution and economic innovation. The well-meaning attempt to hyper-optimize daily life inadvertently imposes a rigid, top-down structure on what should fundamentally remain an open, fluid system, ultimately stifling the spontaneous macro-level mixing that is the indispensable hallmark of a truly thriving metropolis.

Based on the passages, which of the following claims are explicitly or implicitly endorsed by the authors of BOTH Passage A and Passage B? Select all that apply.