Reading comp PrepTest 157 · Section 4 · Question 9

"Persuade" and "inform" are not contrasting descriptions we'd expect from a passage with an Opposing Viewpoints Meta-Structure. Moreover, "inform" as a purpose suggests the author is taking a passive role in the passage — that the author just wants to convey facts, not opinions. That's a poor description of passage B, which definitely wants to convince us that markets aren't as reliable or predictive as many believe.

"Challenge" and "defend" are antonymic, at least. However, the author of passage A isn't challenging the use of markets in any way. According to passage B's characterization (PB, P1, S2), passage A asserts the conventional view on markets. And passage B's author is definitely not attempting to "defend" markets. So while these two words do reflect the opposing viewpoints, it gets the words backward. Remember, we were looking for an answer choice in which the first word connotes a positive view and the second word connotes a skeptical one.

"Present" and "interpret" are not contrasting descriptions we'd expect from a passage with an Opposing Viewpoints Meta-Structure. Moreover, "present" as a purpose suggests the author is taking a passive role — that the author just wants to convey facts, not opinions. That's a poor description of passage A's author, who definitely wants to convince us that markets are very reliable and efficient.

"Entertain" and "educate" are not exactly the contrasting descriptions we'd expect from a passage with an Opposing Viewpoints Meta-Structure. Moreover, "entertain" as a purpose is a poor description of passage A. There's very little use of humor, analogy, or anecdote that might get used in a passage that wants to entertain. ("Entertain" might be a more apt description of passage B, which uses several offbeat comparisons and word choices — like "get over it," "nag," and "random spoofing." Still, the primary purpose is to convey doubt about the reliability of markets, not to entertain the reader.)

Question Type:
Major Point/Method of Reasoning

Strategy Overview:
Review the main point and any primary Meta-Structures, then find an answer that best captures the latter with the details from the former

Answer Anticipation:
A question about the passage's "purpose" asks us to select the answer choice that describes why the author wrote the passage. The correct answer will describe an action: what the author hoped to do in the passage, and how the author accomplished that.

Now, in a broad sense, every author hopes to convince us that the main point is true. However, different authors employ different means to convince us of that main point. That's why the passage's Meta-Structure can be revealing: it helps us predetermine how this specific author was attempting to convey the main point.

This question asks us to contrast the passage's purposes, so we should look at the Meta-Structure that describes the relationship between these two passages. As discussed in the Meta-Structures section above, these two passages feature opposing viewpoints. So we should look for an answer choice that describes two contrasting purposes. Moreover, passage A was pro-markets, while passage B took a more skeptical stance, so we should look for an answer choice that reflects those views. Therefore — note the question stem's use of "respectively," which means "in the order given" — the first word should connote a positive view, while the second word should connect a skeptical view.

Answer Choice Explanation:
"Advocate" and "deflate" are the contrasting descriptions we'd expect from a passage with an Opposing Viewpoints Meta-Structure. Plus, "advocate" connotes a positive view about markets — passage A's author definitely wants to advocate for the reliability and efficiency of markets — and "deflate" connotes a skeptical view — passage B's author intends to deflate economists' beliefs about the reliability of markets. This matches our prediction, and it is correct.

Key Takeaway:
When distilling the passage's purpose to just one word, don't forget the basics! Think about whether the author is taking an active role in arguing the main point (in which case, words like "assert," "persuade," and "argue" are apt), or a passive one (in which case, words like "present," "describe," and "outline" are appropriate). If the author is active, think about whether the author is taking a positive view on the subject (which would support words like "advocate," "defend," and "insist"), or a negative one (which would support words like "challenge," "undermine," or "criticize"). These two criteria are generally enough to find the correct description.