Passage Summary: You can't be a great novelist while working at a university because being a professor stops you from experiencing real life, which is the only way to understand human emotions.

Conclusion: Novelists cannot achieve greatness if they stay within the academic world.

Reasoning: Greatness requires an intuitive grasp of emotions, which is only available through immersion in everyday life, and academia prevents such immersion.

Analysis: The author builds a logical chain: Greatness requires an intuitive grasp of emotions, which in turn requires immersion in everyday life. Since academia is said to preclude this immersion, the author concludes that academics can't be great. For this to hold, the author must assume that an intuitive grasp of emotions is a non-negotiable requirement for greatness. If a novelist could be great through some other means—like pure observation or technical skill—the argument would fall apart. Look for an answer that bridges the gap between 'greatness' and the 'intuitive grasp of emotions.'