Reading comp PrepTest 158 · Section 1 · Question 16

Does this sound like "to criticize a viewpoint about historical scholarship on plagiarism"?

Nope. For that reason, experienced test-takers would cross (A) off. Besides, neither passage traces the "historical development" of a particular idea. Although both passages discuss historical scholarship on plagiarism, tracing the historical development of plagiarism would require the passages to outline how views on plagiarism evolved or changed over time. Neither passage provides that history — we have no idea how the views of people in eighteenth-century France differed from those in fifteenth-century China, for instance — making (A) incorrect.

Question Type:
Major Point/Method of Reasoning

Strategy Overview:
Review both passages' main points and any major Meta-Structures, then find an answer that best captures both passages' Meta-Structure with details from the passages' main points

Answer Anticipation:
A question that asks for the "central purpose" of both passages asks us to select the answer choice that describes why the authors wrote the passages. The correct answer will describe an action: what the authors hoped to do in the passages and how the authors 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 passages' Meta-Structures can be revealing: they help us predetermine how these authors attempt to convey the main points.

In this case, both passages utilize a Criticize a Viewpoint Meta-Structure. In passage A, the author criticizes Rosenthal's study on plagiarism, which discounts the moral dimension of plagiarism in favor of the "required postmodern answer" that there is no difference between plagiarism and imitation in the arts — other than the fact that those in power get to determine which artistic appropriations are considered plagiarism (PA, P1, S2; PA, P3, S1). To the author of passage A, Rosenthal's study is unfortunately emblematic of recent political histories on plagiarism (PA, P3, S4). The author of passage B, in turn, criticizes passage A's argument. The author of passage B acknowledges that passage A makes a few good points (PB, P3, S1-2) but ultimately concludes that setting aside moral considerations can help historians reconstruct what historical figures actually thought about plagiarism (PB, P3, S5).

Therefore, the correct answer will likely sound like "to criticize a viewpoint about historical scholarship on plagiarism." Let's look for something like that in the answer choices.

Answer Choice Explanation:
Does this sound like "to criticize a viewpoint about historical scholarship on plagiarism"?

Yes! The phrase "find fault with" is synonymous with "criticize," and "a scholarly topic" refers to "historical scholarship on plagiarism." Indeed, both passages attempt to find fault with scholars' approach to plagiarism. Passage A finds fault with Rosenthal's postmodern, morally relativist approach, while passage B finds fault with passage A's overly moralistic approach. (Passage B also finds fault with some postmodern, morally relativist approaches, for that matter.) Because this answer choice is consistent with the passages' shared Meta-Structure and doesn't mischaracterize either passage's argument, we can select it and move on to the next question.

Key Takeaway:
Our Meta-Structures help us understand the passage's organization and main point. They also make answering the Method of Reasoning question much easier. If you feel confident that you identified an appropriate Meta-Structure for the passage, simply select the answer choice that sounds most like that Meta-Structure, and make sure it doesn't misdescribe the author's position.

Does this sound like "to criticize a viewpoint about historical scholarship on plagiarism"?

Not quite, although many test-takers are understandably attracted to this answer choice. There are at least two issues with this choice, however.

First, the phrase "examine" is perhaps too neutral to convey the authors' critical attitudes. The author of passage A, especially, uses very opinionated language that expresses strong displeasure towards Rosenthal's postmodern, morally relativist approach. We typically don't use "examine" when we want to say "berate."

Second, neither passage addresses how scholarly attitudes toward plagiarism have shifted over time. That would require the passages to trace how scholars' views in, for example, the nineteenth century compared to scholars' views in the twentieth century. Although passage B briefly discusses how people generally felt about plagiarism in different eras (PB, P1, S1-2), passage B doesn't specify how scholars' attitudes have changed. And passage A confines the discussions to scholars' current attitudes toward plagiarism. So, we can't say these passages' central purpose is to examine scholars' shifting attitudes toward plagiarism.

Does this sound like "to criticize a viewpoint about historical scholarship on plagiarism"?

Nope. Expert test-takers would eliminate (D) once they realized it deviated from their anticipation. Besides, neither passage suggests the postmodern approach to plagiarism is in fact dominant, much less explains how that approach became dominant.

Does this sound like "to criticize a viewpoint about historical scholarship on plagiarism"?

Not quite. This arguably explains the central purpose of passage A (we say "arguably" because passage A isn't just concerned with Rosenthal's book — passage A sees Rosenthal's book as unfortunately representative of a trend in the historical treatment of plagiarism). However, passage B doesn't argue that a book is "deeply problematic." For one, passage B mostly argues against Rick's view, which the introduction tells us is from an essay — not a book. Additionally, passage B doesn't assert that Rick's view is "deeply problematic," as passage B is willing to concede a few points to Ricks (PB, P3, S1-2).