PrepTest 121

[lcid:3581] Prep Test 121 LSAT — Reading Comp — S2 Reading comp

Passage

Questions 1-5  .        Social scientists have traditionally defined  . multipolar international systems as consisting of three  . or more Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Social Science


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • Theory that multipolar systems lead to stability and one example thereof
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Definition
      • Multipolar international systems: three or more nations of roughly equal military and economic strength, which, in theory, create shifting temporary alliances (sentences one and two) and such counterbalancing usually leads to stability (sentence five)
    • Causality
      • Threats from larger, more aggressive members seeking hegemony can result in less powerful members banding together to counter threats and leads to small confrontations; such counterbalancing usually leads to stability (sentences four and five)
    • Example
      • Concert of Europe – the best-known multipolar system which coincided with general peace from 1815-1915 in Europe (sentence six)
    • Author attitude: “constant and inevitable” (sentence four); “best-known” (sentence six)

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • Theory that bipolar systems lead to war and two examples thereof
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Definition
      • Bipolar system: two countries of relatively equal military and economic strength (sentence one)
      • Zero–sum: a situation in which a gain for one side results in an equivalent loss for the other (sentence four)
    • Causality
      • In part because there is only one axis of power, these systems are more rigid and fixed (sentence three)
        • (also a Comparison to the flexible and fluid multipolar system)
      • The quest for overall superiority in this system leads to frequent confrontations, debilitating armed conflict, and the capitulation of one or the other side (sentence five) (also a List)
    • Example
      • Athens and Sparta of Ancient Greece (sentence six)
      • the US and USSR during the Cold War (sentence six)
    • Author attitude: “tend to be” (sentence three)

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Author opinion: we need to reassess the assumptions of bipolar and multipolar systems in this new political landscape
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Causality
      • The shift in the geopolitical landscape post-Cold War calls for a reassessment of these theories (sentence one)
      • Smaller countries in Europe in 1914 brought larger countries into a war, which led to the conditions for WWII (a crippled system with members being punished, dismantled, or withdrawing) (sentence five and six) (also a Comparison and List)
    • Comparison (also Causality)
      • Modern confrontations in multipolar Europe, unlike those in the time of the Concert of Europe that brought stability, could destroy the whole system (sentences two and three) (also an Example)
      • The bipolar Cold War may have created the necessary parameters for general peace in the 20th century (sentence seven)
    • Author attitude: “however,” “calls for a reassessment” (sentence one); “emerging but still vague,” “unsettling” (sentence two); “may also lead” (sentence four);

Main Point:

Key Lines?

P1, S5 - Multipolar leads to stability

P2, S4 - Bipolar leads to war

P3, S1 - Theory needs to be reassessed

Meta-Structure?Criticizing a Viewpoint

This passage follows the Criticizing a Viewpoint Meta-Structure. The author describes a view held by another person or group, in this case the social scientists’ assumptions about bipolar and multipolar international systems, and then criticizes their view. In this case, the criticism is that in the post-Cold War political landscape, it seems like bipolar systems can lead to peace while multipolar systems can lead to war.

Some test-takers may read this as a Correcting the Record passage, but that is more appropriate for when there has been a misconception or oversight. In this case, we see it more as a Criticizing the Viewpoint passage. Either way, the student should come to the same conclusion on the main point: that of the author’s opinion about the Viewpoint or Record.

Main point: Here, the author’s central criticism is that the Cold War has challenged the fundamental assumptions that multipolar and bipolar systems lead to stability and instability, respectively.

Key Minor Meta-Structures

Comparison/Causality

This passage makes extensive use of the Comparison and Causality Minor Meta-Structures as it examines the differences (and causes of these differences) multipolar and bipolar international systems and their characteristics. Making a note of these Comparisons, whether mentally or physically highlighting them or noting it on them on note paper, will help us understand and recall key features of these Comparisons and be ready for the questions,

Last Thoughts?

When looking for the author’s attitude in reading comprehension passages, note that the author does not always have a very strong opinion either way. In this case, the author’s criticism of the viewpoint is that it merely needs to be reassessed, not totally thrown away.

Question prompt

The author's reference to Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: A

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Social Science

Strategy Overview

Review the author’s reference to confrontations leading to capitulations in the passage, consult notes, and choose an answer choice based on your understanding of that reference in the passage’s overall argument

Answer Anticipation

This question asks us why the author inserted the discussion of confrontations leading to capitulations into the second paragraph. Unless a detail conflicts with the paragraph's purpose, the author probably mentioned that detail to advance the paragraph's role. So reviewing the second paragraph’s role, which we hopefully wrote down in the notes on our scratch paper, will generally reveal why the author included that detail.In this case, the second paragraph is there to elaborate on the theory that bipolar systems lead to war, with and two examples thereof. So this detail, that bipolar systems lead to confrontations and capitulations is specifically a feature of the theory of bipolar systems.

Answer choices

  1. A
    indicate that bipolar systems Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A matches the stem

    (A) This matches the role of the detail in the context of a paragraph about bipolar systems. Expert test-takers may want to check the other answer choices before selecting this one just to be sure.

  2. B
    illustrate how multipolar systems Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    (B) No, this is in a paragraph about bipolar systems and nowhere does the passage discuss moving from one to the other type.

  3. C
    contrast the aggressive nature Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    (C) At first glance it seems to be on the right track to say that bipolar systems are more likely to lead to bigger wars, but the statement that bipolar system members are less rational than multipolar members is not supported by the passage.

  4. D
    indicate the anarchic nature Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    (D) No, even though the passage is about international political systems, the passage does not support the idea that they are anarchic.

  5. E
    suggest that military and Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    (E) No, like (B) this detail is from a paragraph on bipolar systems and nowhere in the passage does the author state that the countries’ strengths shifts—instead the author states that alliances shift while the economic and military strengths of the members roughly match.

What this tests

Discussion