Reading comp PrepTest 114 · Section 3 · Question 20

Topic: Social Science

Paragraph 1

• Paragraph note
  • Philip Abrams's new approach to historical sociology (structuring, which acknowledges the mutual influence of society and individuals)
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
  • The problem, according to Abrams:
    • Sociologists studying history either focus too much on how society is made by people or how people are shaped by society (first sentence)
  • The solution, according to Abrams:
    • Sociologists need to recognize that individuals are continuously shaped by society, which is in turn continuously influenced by individuals (second sentence)
  • Definition of "historical sociology": Examining history using sociological tools (first sentence)
  • Abrams's definition of of "structuring": The continuous process of examining how society constructs individuals and how individuals construct society (second and last sentences)

Paragraph 2

• Paragraph note
  • Abrams's historical argument (history is created by individuals whose social "contingencies" shape their actions)
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
  • Abrams's definition of "contingency": social phenomena over which individuals have varying degrees of control (third sentence)
  • Examples of "contingencies," according to Abrams:
    • Socioeconomic status, ideologies, accidents (fourth sentence)
  • Cause-and-effect relationship, according to Abrams:
    • "Contingencies" shape parameters in which individuals can act, and their actions, in turn, shape the society around them (last sentence)

Paragraph 3

• Paragraph note
  • Abrams's analytical roadmap (analyzing significant historical episodes with a fourfold structure)
• Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
  • Abrams's view:
    • To analyze the continuous process of structuring, historical sociologists must analyze historically significant events where individual action and social contingency meet (second through fourth sentences)
  • List of four ways to analyze historically significant people/episodes:
    • Describe the event (last sentence)
    • Describe the social context and significance of the event (last sentence)
    • Trace the life history of the individual involved (last sentence)
    • Analyze the consequences of the event for society and individual (last sentence)

Main Point: Philip Abrams proposes a new approach to historical sociology that relies on the concept of "structuring" — the understanding that individuals whose actions shape history are themselves products of historical social influences or "contingencies."

Reporting a Viewpoint: This passage utilizes a Reporting a Viewpoint Meta-Structure.* The first paragraph introduces the central problem that historical sociologist Philip Abrams will attempt to solve: that most sociologists approach historical sociology by overemphasizing either society's role in shaping the individual or the individual's role in shaping society. Abrams argues, instead, that a more accurate approach would be to simultaneously understand that, while the actions of individuals make history, those individuals have been acted upon by "contingencies," or the conditions in which they lived and their own abilities. These contingencies, in turn, shaped the actions they were able to take. This process, the author tells us, is what Abrams calls "structuring."

The author elaborates on Abrams's model, explaining that Abrams argues historical sociologists should focus on analyzing events to get an accurate picture of what was going on during the era they're studying. Only by understanding both why people involved in an event acted as they did and what social forces allowed them to act that way can historical sociologists truly get the full picture of what happened in society in the past. The author goes on to present a four-part analytical map that Abrams proposes historical sociologists use to fully analyze important events.

The main point in a Reporting A Viewpoint passage is the view held by the subject, in this case, Abrams. The author explains the problem that Abrams sees with the usual approach to historical sociology, lays out the solution Abrams proposes, and gives an example of how Abrams recommends people deploy his solution.

*You could make a solid case that this passage has an Old Approach/New Approach structure. There's the old, lopsided approach to historical sociology and Abrams's new synergistic view of how historical sociology should be conducted. You could also argue that this passage is a kind of Problem/Solution passage, presenting what Abrams sees as the "problem" of one-sided historical sociology and his "solution" to the problem, which is an entirely different approach. What is missing from the passage is any sense of what the author's opinion is of Abrams's approach. This fact swings the balance in favor of the Reporting a Viewpoint structure.

This passage is somewhat rare in that it is impossible to detect what the author's opinion is of the subject being discussed. All the author is doing is reporting what Abrams thinks. In a way, this makes understanding the passage easier, as there are no nuances of authorial tone or perspective that the test-taker needs to keep track of. However, the argument Abrams is making is complicated enough that the test-taker needs to pay close attention to what is being explained in order to answer the questions correctly.