PrepTest 133

[lcid:3631] Prep Test 133 LSAT — Reading Comp — S4 Reading comp

Passage

Questions 22-27 Passage A  .        Central to the historian's profession and  . scholarship has been the ideal of objectivity. Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Social Science


Passage A

Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • Description of historical objectivity
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
    • Central to historians - Objectivity
    • Assumptions - Reality of past; separation between fact and value; separations between history and fiction

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • A distinction (facts vs. interpretation), and a wrong viewpoint
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
    • Value of interpretation = how well accounts for facts
    • Relativists (wrong) - Events lack fixed meanings since meanings change over generations

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Description of how objective historians see selves
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
    • Objective historians - neutral, not advocates or propagandists
    • Analogy - Judges (balance, evenhandedness)
    • Purge of loyalties - allegiance to truth

Passage B

Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • Requirements for historians to avoid propaganda
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
    • For historians to avoid propaganda, must give up wishful thinking, take in bad news, and get rid of bad interpretations

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • A distinction is made, and a potentially counterintuitive implication is explored
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
    • Distinction - Objectivity vs. Neutrality
    • Objectivity - “Powerful argument” - Advocate for one side only after fully understanding arguments for opposing sides/against side being advocated for

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • The distinction is continued
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, points of intersection, and the author's attitude
    • Objective interpretations more powerful and real than neutral ones
    • Author (first-person) - Neutrality plays no part in objectivity
    • Analogy/Comparison - Newscaster

Main Points:

Passage A - Unlike relativist historians, objective historians view their role as that of a neutral judge, presenting historical facts and interpretations only that accounts for these facts, without reflecting any bias or partisanship.

Passage B - Neutrality, which doesn’t consider the merits of different sides, is different from objectivity, which requires a complete understanding of all sides as exemplified by the “powerful argument,” and objectivity is what historians should strive for.

Key Lines?

Passage A:

  • Lines 1-2 - A central concern/view is noted
  • Lines 2-6 - Assumptions of this view are listed
  • Lines 8-10 - A tenet of the view
  • Lines 11-15 - A debate between that view and another
  • Lines 16-19 - More from the viewpoint on their role
  • Lines 18-20 - A comparison

Passage B:

  • Lines 27-32 - Requirements for historical scholarship
  • Lines 33-34 - A key distinction/paradox is established
  • Lines 34-35 - A clear statement of the paradox
  • LInes 38-42 - The Author’s resolution of the paradox
  • Lines 57-60 - The Author’s first-person statement of opinion
  • Lines 60-64 - A comparison

Meta-Structure? Relationship Between Passages?

Both passages deal with the same topic - historical scholarship. And they both deal with objectivity as a key element of historical scholarship. However, they disagree on what that objectivity looks like! Passage A puts forward the view of objective historians that they “must never become an advocate” for a position (Lines 17-18) and that they should be “neutral judge[s]” (Line 17), purging themselves of biases and partisanship (Lines 22-23). The Author of Passage B, on the other hand, believes that “objectivity...should not be confused with neutrality” (Lines 33-34), and that historians should be able to strongly advocate for both sides of a debate (Lines 49-50, among others), and then they can take a side (Line 42).

Comparison - Both passages, to make their points, rely on comparisons or analogies between historians and other professions. In Passage A, the role of historian is compared to that of a judge (Line 20), where neutrality and evenhandedness are important. In Passage B, the role of an objective historian is contrasted with that of a newscaster, where the historian needs to take a side based on the merits of the case, where a newscaster “mechanical[ly]” allocates equivalent time to both sides of a debate.

Paradox (Passage B) - Passage B brings up a paradox (“Yet…”), or a counterintuitive distinction. He argues that historians should be objective, but that doesn’t mean they should be neutral and they can take a strong political stance (Lines 33-35). He then spends the passage explaining this distinction or non-standard definition of objective.

Last Thoughts?

The key to this set of passages appears to be noting that the two passages both set up objectivity as a key element of being a historian, but they have wildly different definitions of what this means. It overlaps in the idea of neutrality, with Passage A setting it out as being a key to the profession and Passage B distinguishing it from objectivity and claiming it’s not key to the profession - and may even be damaging to it (Line 64).

Question prompt

Both passages identify which Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: C

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

Question Type

Social Science

Strategy Overview

Review what the passages say about requirements for historical research and identify an overlap in those requirement

Answer Anticipation

Requirements are logically relevant, creating a strong relationship, and thus we should note them when they come up. While we failed to note any requirements as requirements in Passage A, we did note that Paragraph 1 of Passage B explicitly discussed requirements. Let’s look at the list there (starting in Line 30), then see which ones show up in Passage A.First on the list is abandoning wishful thinking. Does Passage A similarly argue that historians must abandon wishful thinking? Arguably, yes. The Author there says that historians must abandon interpretations that don’t line up with facts and shed partisanship and bias.Second on the list is assimilating bad news. That’s...more or less the same thing as not falling for wishful thinking. And the third thing on the list - discarding favored interpretations that fail elementary tests of logic - also means, more or less, the same thing.Since all of these concepts overlap, they’re all mentioned in Passage A, so let’s find an answer that says anything about giving up wishful thinking/accepting bad news/getting rid of disproven interpretations.

Answer choices

  1. A
    the historian's willingness to Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) (Line 20; Line 61) Both passages talk about separate disciplines (judiciary in Passage A; newscasters in Passage B), so this answer should be considered. However, Passage B argues that historians shouldn’t do what newscasters do (“bears no resemblance to”), so we can eliminate this answer.

  2. B
    the historian's willingness to Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    (B) (Lines 42-49) The Author of Passage B discusses fully embodying the viewpoint before rejecting it, but it doesn’t mention methodologies in that section. Passage A is silent on this topic.

  3. C
    the historian's willingness to Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C matches the stem

    (C) (Lines 10-11; Lines 31-32) Passage A says that interpretations contradicted by facts “should be abandoned.” Passage B says that historical scholarship that wants to avoid being propaganda “requires” historians to “discard pleasing interpretations” that evidence contradicts. Both passages mention this answer as a requirement for historical research, so it’s the correct answer.

  4. D
    the historian's willingness to Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    (D) (Lines 42-49) Similar to (B), this answer deals with the “powerful argument” part of Passage B, and it’s actually closer to the text than that other answer. However, this topic doesn’t show up in Passage A, so we can eliminate this answer.

  5. E
    the historian's willingness to Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    (E) (Lines 42-49) Yet another answer dealing with the “powerful argument” section of Passage B. Since Passage A is silent on the consideration of rival interpretations, this answer is incorrect.

What this tests

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion